Onside Kick

[Masters]

Originally Posted by Flugel

In the end, I think improvement has been happening and it DID show up on the scoreboard when enough of the upgrades weren't wearing blue jeans to games.

If many get there wish and Holmgren reurns to the sidelines - I think it would be on the West Coast where he's from and not here. Therefore, I caution people to be careful what they wish for because that puts Randy Lerner RIGHT BACK in charge of fire to hire in the absence of understanding criteria of WHY you fire to rehire. You do it to upgrade instead of doing it to please fans temporarily without a competant solution.

The FIRST thing we need to be concerned with is - does Holmgren like being in the front office better than on the sidelines in California where SF and San Diego will probably be looking for someone like him.

I'd agree there has been improvement. Where I disagree with many is how much improvement. Not getting blown out is an improvement. But not getting beat down and having "watchable" games are not the goal. The important win/loss columns is where the improvement needs to be, and it's not. Especially when several of those close games are games that should have and could have been won.

I don't want MH back on the sidelines, and I don't think he will be, anywhere. I think he's hung up that hat and doesn't want those hours again. If MH is to leave and go coach else where, then I hope Lerner is smart enough to hand the keys over to Heckert.

SD isn't changing coaches and has already come out publicly saying it. Not to mention their entire staff has extensions through 2013. They aren't going to eat that money. I don't think the lure of SF is even a real lure for Holmgren. That's not the 49er team he got his start with.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Masters

It's exaggerated because all didn't need to be replaced, which is what I said.

5) didn't even replace until late in the season and the replacement you pointed out was on the roster, Harrison.
6) didn't need replaced but was because EM couldn't get him on board or get along with him.
8) didn't need replaced but was because EM couldn't get him on board or get along with him. (was replaced by Royal)

On Shaffer, is St. Clair really been an upgrade? Wasn't necessity to replace Shaffer, but EM traded him away.

That drops your 8 to 5, hence the exaggeration. You got 2 guys on that list that did NEED replacing, but were replaced by EM's hand, and a 3rd guy whose replacement was already sitting on the roster and part of that O.

Come on Masters, you're nitpicking at semantics to take this so far away from the point I was making. I named 8 new faces that clarified my original point that chemistry and continuity wasn't gonna be immediate. New regimes all over America purge out unhappy campers. It's inevitable. Winslow and Edwards were UNHAPPY long before Mangini arrived AND they clearly understood this team wasn't ready to rock in season #1 under a new Head Coach inheriting only 4 draft picks. That being the case, it was win-win to get rid of both and added to the draft volume of 4 Savage left us for 2009. I'll bet Watson had just as good of a season as Winslow in 2010 and probably better considering how worthless of a blocker Winslow was after all those knee surgeries following his recreational bicycle ride (unfootball related).

Regardless of our approval rating for who started and who upgraded - the offense ended up #8 overall out of 32 at rushing the ball in a season we would close out with 4 consecutive wins. Again this was vrs 8-9 men in the box playing run exclusively. Once they realized the chemistries and some degree of continuity took place - they succeeded in SOMETHING considering all the challenges and limitations they were working around. That was my point about it taking time and there WAS some degree of success after 8 new faces began starting at different points of the year. There was probably more than 8 new starters considering how Royal got phased out for a more TE named Moore.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Masters

I'd agree there has been improvement. Where I disagree with many is how much improvement. Not getting blown out is an improvement. But not getting beat down and having "watchable" games are not the goal. The important win/loss columns is where the improvement needs to be, and it's not. Especially when several of those close games are games that should have and could have been one.

I don't want MH back on the sidelines, and I don't think he will be, anywhere. I think he's hung up that hat and doesn't want those hours again. If MH is to leave and go coach else where, then I hope Lerner is smart enough to hand the keys over to Heckert.

SD isn't changing coaches and has already come out publicly saying it. Not to mention their entire staff has extensions through 2013. They aren't going to eat that money. I don't think the lure of SF is even a real lure for Holmgren. That's not the 49er team he got his start with.

I hope you are right about Holmgen!

There were at least 3 winable games I thought we pissed away. The Buffalo game died with a FG at their 1 yard line on drive #1. HATED the playcalling after an incredibly easy drive into goal to goal. No confidence in Jake then WHY not put a guy that can move around and resent playaction opportunities especially inside the 10 yard line? As much as I like Mangini, I didn't understand the stubbornness to keep Ricky Ankiel in at QB which told 21 other starters "why bother today?"

The TB game when they left Delhomme out there limping all over the place and throwing off the back foot. I gaged that we didn't have 1 coach saying this guy can't plant or step into throws so the blitz is gonna KILL us if we don't change this now. They didn't and lost a winable game. Not only that, Delhomme's gift to Barber had their offense setting up shop in goal to goal situation. Crap like that. Dawson misses a VERY makable FG vrs KC on a day they never scored an offensive TD and received a pic 6.

The fumble vrs the Jets in overtime with the Browns getting close to the 30 yard line of the Jets. Stuff like that drove me crazy.

Carolina missed 2 easy FGs so that was close to being another piss away.

I'm looking forward to the day this team has playmakers at WR. I was REALLY thinking Cribbs was ready to break out as you know but it seems like that was more me being a HOMER wishful thinking as many of you warned me.

I think we should give Mangini a chance to swing at the 3rd pitch; AND I'm not opposed to getting a new coordinator on either side of the ball. Look at what Mike Martz was able to do for Chicago after they fired Norv Turner's brother Ron. They don't exactly have superstar WRs there either and taming Cutler looks like it has had many challenges along the way. That said, it's happening. I STILL want us to draft a WR that can give this passign game a hefty boost and change matchups for the better for our other WRs.

I gotta split Masters. Thanks for the conversation. Happy New Years to you and everyone here!

[Riffer X]

I love reading your guys stuff.

[Masters]

Originally Posted by Flugel

Come on Masters, you're nitpicking at semantics to take this so far away from the point I was making. I named 8 new faces that clarified my original point that chemistry and continuity wasn't gonna be immediate. New regimes all over America purge out unhappy campers. It's inevitable. Winslow and Edwards were UNHAPPY long before Mangini arrived AND they clearly understood this team wasn't ready to rock in season #1 under a new Head Coach inheriting only 4 draft picks. That being the case, it was win-win to get rid of both and added to the draft volume of 4 Savage left us for 2009. I'll bet Watson had just as good of a season as Winslow in 2010 and probably better considering how worthless of a blocker Winslow was after all those knee surgeries following his recreational bicycle ride (unfootball related).

Regardless of our approval rating for who started and who upgraded - the offense ended up #8 overall out of 32 at rushing the ball in a season we would close out with 4 consecutive wins. Again this was vrs 8-9 men in the box playing run exclusively. Once they realized the chemistries and some degree of continuity took place - they succeeded in SOMETHING considering all the challenges and limitations they were working around. That was my point about it taking time and there WAS some degree of success after 8 new faces began starting at different points of the year. There was probably more than 8 new starters considering how Royal got phased out for a more TE named Moore.

It's not nit picking, if your point was EM came into a situation where he NEEDED to replace 8 starters on O. There weren't 8 spots, heck there were only 3 now that I go back and remember Hadnot was still here and under contract last year, same with Hank. Winslow garnered a pick last daft (and wasted).

Edwards was traded mid season, so the picks received from his trade did nothing to improve the 4 picks you bring up. In hindsight, CLE might has well only went into the draft with 4 picks in 2009, because all those extra picks got them a whole lot of nothing. Sure you have to get rid of unhappy campers, but when you have nothing to replace them with I don't want to hear the sob story about NEEDING to replace them. That inventing excuses for EM and this team. There are other ways to prevent those guys from rocking the boat. If you can't keep guys from rocking the boat and your solution for every guy who might is ship them out, you are not long for HC in the NFL, because you won't win.

Winslow in 2010 has 63 receptions, 702 yards, 11 y/c, and 5 TDs, while being a great safety valve for a young QB, and blocking which has a UDFA RB going for 1,000 yards. Watson has similar production this year. But that's now this year, 2 years removed from shipping of Winslow, who in 2009 (the year EM came in and the O really could have used him) went for 77 catches, almost 900 yards, and 5 TDs.

Royal didn't get phased out, he went out with injury from weeks 11-16. That's what triggered signing Moore off of GB's practice squad. By the end of the season, sure they had 8 new starters. But that wasn't your lead. You lead was when EM came in he needed to replace 8 starters on O, which is a big exaggeration (was only 4 at most).

What did winning those 4 games net CLE? Nothing they carried over to this year. The guy who carried them and got them all the rushing yards to really put them at 8th ended up in the coaches dog house, misused, and shipped out of town. CLE has now also dropped to 19th in the league in rushing.

[Masters]

Originally Posted by Flugel

I hope you are right about Holmgen!

There were at least 3 winable games I thought we pissed away. The Buffalo game died with a FG at their 1 yard line on drive #1. HATED the playcalling after an incredibly easy drive into goal to goal. No confidence in Jake then WHY not put a guy that can move around and resent playaction opportunities especially inside the 10 yard line? As much as I like Mangini, I didn't understand the stubbornness to keep Ricky Ankiel in at QB which told 21 other starters "why bother today?"

The TB game when they left Delhomme out there limping all over the place and throwing off the back foot. I gaged that we didn't have 1 coach saying this guy can't plant or step into throws so the blitz is gonna KILL us if we don't change this now. They didn't and lost a winable game. Not only that, Delhomme's gift to Barber had their offense setting up shop in goal to goal situation. Crap like that. Dawson misses a VERY makable FG vrs KC on a day they never scored an offensive TD and received a pic 6.

The fumble vrs the Jets in overtime with the Browns getting close to the 30 yard line of the Jets. Stuff like that drove me crazy.

Carolina missed 2 easy FGs so that was close to being another piss away.

I'm looking forward to the day this team has playmakers at WR. I was REALLY thinking Cribbs was ready to break out as you know but it seems like that was more me being a HOMER wishful thinking as many of you warned me.

I think we should give Mangini a chance to swing at the 3rd pitch; AND I'm not opposed to getting a new coordinator on either side of the ball. Look at what Mike Martz was able to do for Chicago after they fired Norv Turner's brother Ron. They don't exactly have superstar WRs there either and taming Cutler looks like it has had many challenges along the way. That said, it's happening. I STILL want us to draft a WR that can give this passign game a hefty boost and change matchups for the better for our other WRs.

I gotta split Masters. Thanks for the conversation. Happy New Years to you and everyone here!

Love the Rick Ankiel line! Had me rolling!

I agree on BUF, CAR (almost gave away), and TB. I'll add in ATL where EM went to Delhomme who obviously was too hurt to even be the number two and should not have been brought into that game (promptly throws that game away). KC game where CLE decides to go into a shell for the entire second half to protect a 14 to 10 lead. Against Cincy two weeks ago, much like in BUF, CLE had an opportunity to go for it close to the goal line and settled for 3pts.

As for the Jets game, what drives me the most nuts about that game is EM playing for a tie. I love that he went for it on first down deep in his own territory. But then that fails and he plays to run out the clock and a tie? This isn't hockey where you get points for a tie. What message does that send to your team? "Hey guys, we are going to go for the tie". If I was a player I'd be channeling my inner Herm Edwards "you play to win the game".

I am still waiting to see Sunday to finalize my opinion on if EM should get another year. The more I think about it though, I don't think changing the OC will solve the offensive problems. The philosophy starts at the HC. So changing guys isn't going to change EM's approach to the game. So we'll likely still get more of the same with a different face.

Have a happy and safe New Year Tom!

[Crow]

I _love_ Herm Edwards, Masters.

Just not as a coach.

[Masters]

Originally Posted by Crow

I _love_ Herm Edwards, Masters.

Just not as a coach.

Same here. He's great outside of being a NFL HC.