Cavs Bounce Back Against Blazers
January 22, 2009Coast To Coast
January 22, 2009While it was briefly mentioned in today’s “While We’re Waiting,” several of you have mentioned that this story is bigger than the few hundred words that were given by the Plain Dealer. In the wake of what is undoubtedly a tough time for businesses across the nation, the Cleveland Browns have given the heave-ho to a handful of team employees.
In the last two days, the Browns have laid off 18 employees. One of them was the Director of Media Relations Ken Mather. For the last year, he was always just the name that was at the bottom of team-related news that was sent my way. Now, he is a guy that undoubtedly worked very hard to get where he was – and now he is no longer there.
Browns President Mike Keenan – now famous from the Eric Mangini press conference – had the following to say:
“It was a very challenging day for the Browns organization and it’s important to acknowledge the contributions of those who are currently with the Browns as well as those that are leaving. We are not immune to the current economic climate and in order to ensure that our business operates in an honest, efficient and realistic manner, we were faced with extremely difficult decisions.”
And while I can believe that the Browns are having a tough go at it given the region in which they reside, coupled with the macro economy in general, I have a tough time sympathizing with Randy Lerner and his crew.
Over the past year alone, we have seen the following contract extensions signed within the coaching ranks:
Romeo Crennel: Two years, $4 million
Phil Savage: Three years, $3 million
Mel Tucker: Two years, terms undisclosed
Rob Chudzinski: Two years, terms undisclosed
Now, figure in that all four of these men are no longer with the team – while still being paid – and something here does not smell right. Sure, you can say that “it’s business,” and that the team chose to fire the four coaches knowing well that they would still be due their money. But then to follow this up by firing 18 team employees due to “challenging times?” Please.
I am not sure how much Mr. Mather and the rest of those laid off made in terms of salaries, but I’m willing to bet that it was nowhere near the paychecks taken home by Crennel et al.
We could go on and on about the poor decisions made at the player level, but these are decisions that were made by one of the men that are no longer here. And while these decisions (Derek Anderson, Kevin Shaffer, Donte Stallworth…) will continue to haunt the Browns payroll for the foreseeable future, the fact that the team then has to punish their employees (as well as their respective families) is appalling.
Oh, and the layoffs are not done yet. Reports say that the team may in fact lay off up to 40 employees before it is all said and done.
Great allocation of resources, eh? Here’s hoping that all effected land on their feet.
28 Comments
Wow…great stuff…never thought of it that way…sad for those who lost their jobs while those four failures still get paid.
The Browns corporate motto should be: Square Peg, Round Hole, Big Hammer – the little guy gets screwed because of upper management incompetency again.
Having worked in pro sports in this region, many employees make less in salary for the “fun” of working for a pro sports team. It often can be a rewarding experience and having done it, I understand their career choice. I’d say many make 50-75% of what their position would pay in a different field. (i.e. doing PR for Browns vs. PR for a health care company).
But given the brutal payments to Butch, Romeo, Savage, Tucker, Chud, and the Grantham, these lay-offs are BRUTAL.
Given that player salaries are related to reveue and a lot of revenue is fixed (media rights, some merchandise, etc), this speaks to a completely mis-managed organization.
I do not know any current employees personally, but have great empathy for those laid off. When certain former Browns are kept on payroll as “favors”, and other given financial help, this is sad.
My advice to those laid off – go work in another field. You’ll miss the “cool” aspect but will enjoy the shorter hours, better pay, and have pride knowing your new boss is not a bungling fool like “The Randolph”.
This isn’t to defend Lerner, by no means am I a supporter or defender of his, and the contract extensions were a horrible decision, but I don’t know that that’s a sound argument. If we’re going to go there, others will argue that if they didn’t have to pay Dante Stallworth $5mil a year, they wouldn’t have to fire those people… I mean, does Braylon really need to drive a Bentley? That cost of that car alone may pay 10 people’s salaries, right?
This isn’t a zero-sum game–money for one doesn’t come at the expense of the other. Paying a coach less doesn’t mean they hire more web designers or give the janitors a raise.
It’s popular and easy to say that these billionaires should suck it up and can afford to continue to pay people and allow them to keep their jobs in a down economy… but most billionaires didn’t become billionaires by running inefficient operations. I expect some flames for making these comments, but that’s the way it is.
I’ll be the first to agree that the big salaries for GM/HC types has become outrageous, but that’s the free market establishing their value. And each owner will determine what price they’ll pay in an effort to be competitive (or in Lerner’s case, hope that throwing more and more money at the problem will overcome the mistakes.) But whether they were paying contracts on fired coaches/GMs or not, it’s doubtful that it would make a difference for those to be laid off. HC/GM contracts aren’t overhead, support personnel are. It’s sad to see anybody losing their jobs, but the Browns have a business side to the operation, and like any other business, good management will make tough choices to operate efficiently in response to their economic environment.
That doesn’t mean I feel bad for Lerner, he’s doing just fine. And it is absolutely brutal to see how The Randolph thinks he can cover up his mistakes by throwing money at the problem, and it’s sad to see anyone losing their jobs. But the moves we’re discussing would be made regardless of how many ex-coaches they’re still paying or how much they’re paying Mangini or how much they’re paying anybody on the field… their money isn’t coming out of the pockets (or the budgets for) the 9-to-5ers.
“but most billionaires didn’t become billionaires by running inefficient operations”
He may have started SAI, but it’s pretty safe to say that this billionaire wouldn’t be a billionaire if not for his late father.
of all industries, sports seems to be one least challenged by the times. NFL teams all get their share of the enormous TV revenue, which only increases over time. All the tickets, or pretty much all of them, are sold out before the season. Advertisements are paid for as well.
I suppose since there was decreasing attendance by those already holding paid for tickets, revenue suffered in the game day merchandise and vending area, but enough to cost 18-40 people their jobs?
They can pay Donte Stallworth $5,000,000 but can’t keep on a staffer making $50,000? Something is fundamentally wrong with the sports world. I’m not sure when, but it may be soon, but it can’t go on like this, where the bum on the end of the bench gets a quarter million minimum plus all the perks, and other people are busting their asses for a fifth of that and are let go when the bums act like bums.
I really didn’t want to focus on the player-level pay. There’s a salary cap, so every team is essentially similar. Thoes salaries that do not go against the cap (HC, GM, etc) do effect the owner. And when you have eight guys on the books for four slots, that’s a lot of cash that could be used elsewhere…
@scott – Couldn’t have said it any better
I don’t think anybody is saying player salaries caused the layoffs – those are in reality a fixed expense.
Let’s assume 40 employees laid off made 60k a year (EXTREMELY GENEROUS) – that’s 2.4 million.
Perhaps the Browns are sensing major fan discontent, non-renewal of advertising, season ticket, luxury suites, etc. I could only wish this is a sign of an owner trimming things to prepare a company for sale.
The name of the door is FAIL.
“He may have started SAI, but it’s pretty safe to say that this billionaire wouldn’t be a billionaire if not for his late father.”
I’m fully aware of that, Scott. You won’t find one single comment from me–anywhere–where I don’t question Randy’s business savvy. You’ll find dozens of posts from me on this very site saying the same thing you just did, when people try to argue that he’s a successful owner/businessman.
But the bottom line remains, the Browns are a business. They have P&L statements, they have managers, who have budgets, who are going to do their best to run an efficient operation. Across the NFL, franchises are making cutbacks. The NFL office itself has significantly reduced its workforce–they handed out pink slips a week or two before Christmas.
Trust me, I’m not attributing any extra credit to Randy.
“Thoes salaries that do not go against the cap (HC, GM, etc) do effect the owner. And when you have eight guys on the books for four slots, that’s a lot of cash that could be used elsewhere…”
So when Randy was negotiating Mangini’s contract… say he thinks he can get him for $2.5 million per year, and Mangini counters that he won’t take less than $3m. Do you really believe that Randy goes back and looks at his ledgers and consults his accountants to see who he needs to lay off so he can put that extra money in Mangini’s pocket?
Coaching staff and GM salaries are not overhead.
“I don’t think anybody is saying player salaries caused the layoffs”
Just to be doubly clear, I’m not suggesting that.
“There’s a salary cap, so every team is essentially similar”
The salary cap is irrelevant to the argument, too. There is also a salary floor, which is significantly less than the salary cap. An owner could very easily pare back his roster’s payroll and get significantly more cash flow into his pockets. But regardless, what they pay a HC, or a GM, or a QB, or the 53rd guy on the roster who never sniffs the field… it doesn’t come at the expense of the support staff or the business operations.
I understand where you’re coming from, mj. And I’m not saying that these layoffs were a direct effect of having four paid coaches that are not currently performing their services for the Browns. I’m just saying that it doesn’t help, and especially doesn’t cast a great image of a guy that most fans already question.
mj-nothing I can add, great stuff!
Likewise, Scott. And this is obviously a very emotionally-charged issue. I’m sure I’m not the only one that knows exactly what it feels like to be one of those laid-off/downsized employees, and questioning the justice in that when you see that your company is posting record profits, or the CEO that gets fired for tanking his company’s stock price but gets a $12million golden parachute to ease his exit…
But I’m always wary of falling into that line of thinking–it’s dangerous. It’s a diversionary tactic that is all too often employed by those seeking to manipulate and placate people, and which hits very close to home for me.
“I’m just saying that it doesn’t help, and especially doesn’t cast a great image of a guy that most fans already question.”
Yeah… Randy and his public image… man, this guy has some serious problems in that area, doesn’t he? Yikes.
I don’t know much about this Ken Mather, Director of Media Relations, but they could certainly use an upgrade in that department. Not sure but this could have been sugar-coated as a “layoff” for the sake of his career. The entire organization could stand to sit in more PR training sessions and the leadership in that department needs to get better. They need someone who will keep the mouths of Braylon, Kellen, and even the leadership (Savage emails from last year?) in line.
I am sickened and saddened by this. Just disgusting. Everyone is bringing up the money owed to Crennel, Savage and the coordinators — at least that money is owed to them by contract.
What about giving Butchie $12 million after he QUIT?! The Steelers have always taken the ‘little’ people with them to the Super Bowls they frequent and win. Whether we like to admit it or not, Pittsburgh is a first-class organization that does EVERYTHING right. The Browns, meanwhile, are classless and do EVERYTHING wrong. And there you have it.
This reminds me of a story a friend of mine told me a couple years ago. He used to work for the Cavs during the early part of the decade and was a low-paid intern in 2004 when the mascot, Whammer (you remember him right!?), put a Ricky Davis jersey on the end of a mop and wiped the floor with it. His antics cost the team $10,000, or some other ridiculous figure, and the week after that happened they told my friend that they’d have to let him go. Needless to say, he was incensed that an idiot polar bear mascot ostensibly cost him his job.
That being said, feel sorry for the Browns employees affected by the ripple effect of bad organizational decisions…at least no mascots were involved…other than Romeo…sorry RAC
@ bridgecrosser…”The name of the door is FAIL” freaking hilarious!
@ bridgecrosser “The name of the door is FAIL.” Freaking hilarious!
[…] Recent Browns Lay-offs blamed on the economy — (WFNY) […]
[…] we ran a post regarding the recent lay-offs among the Cleveland Browns staff. While the reasons for this cost […]
@ MJ
“But the bottom line remains, the Browns are a business. They have P&L statements, they have managers, who have budgets”
WHOA. Just because a business has a bad year you shouldn’t have to start laying off people.
A good business puts money away for a tough time. Businesses that do this are best positioned to work in a down economy and are able to realize even greater profits when the macro economy improves.
I think this is the root of what’s getting a lot of people fired up. The Browns were positioned to bankroll some serious jack the past 10 years and they failed to do so (or did are still laying people off nonetheless.)
@ Nick D- thanks.
“WHOA. Just because a business has a bad year you shouldn’t have to start laying off people.”
I don’t think I said that, and if I implied that, I am sorry.
“A good business puts money away for a tough time. Businesses that do this are best positioned to work in a down economy and are able to realize even greater profits when the macro economy improves.”
Indeed. But, they also contract and consolidate during the lean times. It’s just the natural business cycle.
My only intent was to point out the fallacy that somehow contracts being paid out to coaches and ex-coaches are at all related to the layoffs/firings.
‘My only intent was to point out the fallacy that somehow contracts being paid out to coaches and ex-coaches are at all related to the layoffs/firings.” –
How is this a fallacy? If they are an end-sum financial organization, doesn’t a loss in executive salary impact them as much as somewhere else? Connect the dots please.
Also, I don’t accept your “natural business cycle” about lay-offs at all. What is your basis for this? The economy was also in the tank in 2001 but the Browns weren’t laying individuals off.
Again, there are numerous organizations through the same economic cycle and not laying off people. Perhaps they are just better managed, have more empathy for employees, and manage losses better?
“How is this a fallacy?”
Already explained in my earlier posts in this thread, you can read it there, I’m not going to repeat myself. If you believe that Randy sits there and counts how many support staff he has to let go to pay his HC what he’s asking during negotiations, you’re an idiot.
“Also, I don’t accept your “natural business cycle” about lay-offs at all. What is your basis for this?”
Common sense? Logic? Business experience? If you think I’m making this stuff up, google ‘business cycle’ and educate yourself, but I’m not about to teach an introductory economics class. You don’t have to “accept” the laws of gravity, either, but that doesn’t lessen its impact.
“The economy was also in the tank in 2001 but the Browns weren’t laying individuals off.”
Not a valid comparison. Infinite variables at work. The 2001 economy was nothing like it is now. They were a nascent organization in 2001, they are established now. Different managers making different decisions. Etc, etc, etc.
“Again, there are numerous organizations through the same economic cycle and not laying off people.”
There are also numerous organizations that are (what, if everyone doesn’t operate in lockstep, it’s somehow not valid?) The Redskins have had significant layoffs. As have the Patriots. The 49ers. There are probably others I’ve missed, and there will certainly be others doing the same. The NFL itself got rid of some 10% of their workforce right before Christmas, if memory serves.
Who knows what the reasons are why, for example, the Redskins had mass layoffs and the NY Giants haven’t. Unfortunately, the NFL teams don’t make their financial statements public, so we can’t analyze them to see why. Perhaps they are better managed. Perhaps they were running a leaner operation to start with. Perhaps luxury suites are up for renewal in one city but not in the other. Perhaps they had a large legal staff, and had more people to be let go now that the NFL is centralizing legal services and offering it to the teams, lessening the need to keep as many lawyers on staff. There are near-infinite possibilities, and without being a high-level business exec or owner, it’s doubtful we could know the specific factors that lead to those decisions. But what is not at cause is how Randy spends his millions (i.e., the $100m plus that Randy pays his players every year, the $10m he have to the UK’s National Portrait Gallery, the estimated $20m plus he’s paying to coaches and GMs he fired.) He’s going to do that whether he’s got 10 or 100 or 1000 people working in Berea.
Tell ya what, BC… here’s a question for you. If paying fired HCs and GMs and OCs and the like leads to layoffs, then this should be an easy one. How many staff did the Browns lay off to pay for Chris Palmer’s firing? (when the Browns famously paid him *more* than his contract value to go away.) How many staff did the Browns lay off to be able to afford Butch Davis’s $12m when he *quit*? Prove your point and show me where it’s linked (as opposed to demonstrating the predictable knee-jerk emotional reaction) and I’ll reconsider. Otherwise, there’s really nothing further to discuss.