Cleveland Browns on the cusp of stability and winning seasons

[BernietheKid]

Cleveland Browns on the cusp of stability and winning seasons

By Zac Wassink, Yahoo! Contributor Network Nov 19, 11:00 am EST

"Why are the Browns always so terrible?" is a question I'm often asked by New York sports fans unfamiliar with Cleveland sports. It's really a complex question that has numerous answers, such as a plethora of worthless draft picks and the lack of serious play makers since 1999. The main thing that has been killing this franchise over the past decade is really quite simple.

Stability.

Since the Browns returned to the NFL in 1999, the team has had (as of the writing of this piece) five different head coaches and roughly 71 different quarterbacks. Comparing the Browns to Super Bowl winning franchises of the past decade is sad for numerous reasons, but the main thing that stands out is that a head coaching carousel never equals championships. The Patriots have had one head coach over the past ten years. The Steelers have had two. The Colts have had three (Mora's last season was 2001). You get the idea.


Before disgruntled Cleveland fans remind me of the team's current record (3-6 as of the writing of this), I want to point out the "on the cusp" that's in the title. I'm well aware that the 2007 Browns were even closer to stability with a rocket-armed quarterback, a "players coach" and a 10-6 record. In hindsight, that team's fall from grace is now very easy to predict. Romeo Crennel just wasn't meant to be a head coach in the NFL and the roster had way too many holes and "me first" players.

The biggest quality the 2007 Browns lacked was leadership. We now know that many in the locker room did not respect quarterback Derek Anderson(notes) as the offense's leader and that Crennel was too busy being friends with the guys to be any sort of authority figure. The Browns were a disaster waiting to happen.

Even with a losing record, the current crop of Browns are headed in a completely different direction; that being the right one. Rookie QB Colt McCoy(notes) is earning the respect of what will be "his offense" with every snap. Driving down the field for a game-tying score against the Jets is something that either Tom Brady(notes) or Peyton Manning(notes) would struggle to accomplish, and McCoy completed the task looking like a ten-year veteran. Don't be fooled by head coach Eric Mangini's refusal to name
McCoy his starting QB. Barring injury, Colt will be taking the snaps for the Browns until the end of 2010 (and hopefully long into the distant future).

And what of head coach Eric Mangini? Is 3-6 really something to get excited about? Considering Cleveland's roster and schedule, I'd say so. The Browns lost their first three games by a total of twelve points. The team's worst loss, McCoy's first career start, was a 28-10 "not as bad as the final score indicates" defeat in Pittsburgh. Cleveland currently has wins in New Orleans and against New England. Things really could be a lot worse.

More importantly, the entire team is beginning to embrace Mangini's leadership. Since October 24, the Browns have been one of the hardest teams to play in the NFL. Just ask New Orleans, New England and the Jets. As I stated back in August, Mangini pulled a Tom Coughlin during the off-season, and his players have responded. I could think of nothing worse for this current roster than having to start all over…again…with a different head coach.

The Browns are even stable in the front office. General manager Tom Heckert and team president Mike Holmgren selected stand-outs Joe Haden(notes), T.J. Ward(notes) and the aforementioned McCoy in the 2010 NFL Draft. They then pulled off the best trade of the off-season when they acquired stud running back Peyton Hillis(notes) and conditional draft picks for a third string quarterback.

With all of this said, the 2010 Cleveland Browns aren't finishing 8-8. This is a very banged up team that still doesn't have a single dependable wide receiver. Winners in the NFL aren't built in a day, though. Look at how dreadful things got for teams such as the Giants and the Colts before they became contenders. Tampa Bay is even on the cusp of being a perennial threat. The Browns aren't "there" yet. If you've watched this team in 2010, you can see they're close.

Really close.

Cleveland Browns on the cusp of stability and winning seasons - NFL - Yahoo! Sports

[golfer704u]

It's like the author dug into my head and wrote what I was thinking. I can't agree anymore than I do with this article.

[Sez.EJ]

I will go With the stablility concept AFTER next season begins (not for players, but for the coaching staff) . I am still of a mind that this is a make or break season for Mangini in the eyes of Holmgren.. So far I would say he's passing the eyeball test..The other factor that plays into this is Daboll. Holmgren has said publicly he does not like Dabolls offensive philosophy. Now I am sure Mike has dissected Dabolls playbook and his mind since he's been there.. So no matter how well Daboll does.. If your philosophy goes against the GM.. It does not bode well for you..

Now losing an OC..does not (in my mind) create instability within and organization.. The question is.. If Mangini is so loyal to Daboll he will risk his job to keep him.. Then there is the question of does Holmgren want a west coach offensive type coach and Mangini is gone no matter what he does. So for stability in the coaching department.. We will see..

Being on the cusp with the players in terms of stablity.. there I believe we are closer than we have been since the return. We are still short on playmakers, but the base of the team is in place.. Still many places we need to upgrade.. But I will leave those arguments and discussions for the offseason.. for now.. I am loving this year.

[Enigmatic Evil]

I think how we close the season will spell more for Daboll's fate than Mangini's. If we finish strong and the offense continues to improve, especially with Colt McCoy behind center. I bet you it will save Brian Daboll's job for another season. If our record is worse than the 5-11 we had last season, or even 5-11 again, I bet there will be some changes made in some capacity.

Sez, I think you raise a lot of good points like the OC's place in offensive chemistry. The guy calling the plays, its a bit different then the players executing those plays. A change in offensive philosiphy may off-set chemistry momentarily but I really think an offensive mindset that can embrace the power running game we've established this season but also show a bit more bravado with the passing game would be idea. Daboll just needs to bring some more courage to his play calls. When he's done that we have won football games. It's been proven on the field.

[Vegasdogg]

Good write up. No hyperbole on the good or bad. I have been a virtual split personality with Mangini since his arrival. I have now entered the "wait and see" hotel, but I am fast approaching the "keep him for next season" motel. They must finish this season well, and he needs to keep this team moving in the right direction. We'll see. Too many changes at head coach has obviously been a bad thing, but that always included the FO as well.

[golfer704u]

Originally Posted by Sez.EJ

I will go With the stablility concept AFTER next season begins (not for players, but for the coaching staff) . I am still of a mind that this is a make or break season for Mangini in the eyes of Holmgren.. So far I would say he's passing the eyeball test..The other factor that plays into this is Daboll. Holmgren has said publicly he does not like Dabolls offensive philosophy. Now I am sure Mike has dissected Dabolls playbook and his mind since he's been there.. So no matter how well Daboll does.. If your philosophy goes against the GM.. It does not bode well for you..

Now losing an OC..does not (in my mind) create instability within and organization.. The question is.. If Mangini is so loyal to Daboll he will risk his job to keep him.. Then there is the question of does Holmgren want a west coach offensive type coach and Mangini is gone no matter what he does. So for stability in the coaching department.. We will see..

Being on the cusp with the players in terms of stablity.. there I believe we are closer than we have been since the return. We are still short on playmakers, but the base of the team is in place.. Still many places we need to upgrade.. But I will leave those arguments and discussions for the offseason.. for now.. I am loving this year.

What's interesting if you try to get into my head (don't try it, it's a horrible horrible place....) is that for all my defense of Mangini and even my feeling that it wasn't Dabols playcalling that cost us this week, I do agree with your post.

If Holmgren doesn't agree with Dabolls playbook this year, it's quite likely he could ask Mangini to replace him. And I agree that just changing OC's won't ruin the stability this team is building. And I also agree Mangini just might be loyal (and stupid) enough to demand to keep Daboll and that could cost him his job. If it does, then I'll blame Mangini and not Holmgren.

I stil hope we can keep Mangini and maybe Daboll continues to improve as an OC, but I agree with your post.

[Greythan]

I don't think Mangini will sacrifice himself for Daboll if it comes to that. I really don't.

Reason? I don't think Daboll's "system" is Mangini's system. Its not like Mangini was a OC with Daboll as his QB Coach.

This could work out perfectly for us from a stability standpoint: we keep Mangini and replace our OC with someone closer to Holmgren's west coast philosophy. (I said "closer" but not a pure WCO disciple.)

[golfer704u]

Originally Posted by Greythan

I don't think Mangini will sacrifice himself for Daboll if it comes to that. I really don't.

Reason? I don't think Daboll's "system" is Mangini's system. Its not like Mangini was a OC with Daboll as his QB Coach.

This could work out perfectly for us from a stability standpoint: we keep Mangini and replace our OC with someone closer to Holmgren's west coast philosophy. (I said "closer" but not a pure WCO disciple.)

I've been hesitant to say this out loud, for fear it comes true, but we may have a new DC next year too. I wish Randy would name him assitand HC and give him 12 million a season.....

[Greythan]

Agreed Golfer. Its scary.

[nickers]

There are several teams that run thier version of the WCO...They may not be pure WCO...I can see Holmgren making some bit of change in terms of the passing game and going after big physical recievers in next years FA/Draft and maintain stability with the running game Hillis/Hardesty or whomever compliments Hillis. Holmgre has stated himself hes screamed and pulled his hair at some of the play calling this season. And without a burner to stretch defenses expect to see 8 in the box the rest of the way.