Delonte West Missing from Practice Again (Updated)
September 30, 2009Eric Wedge Takes High Road in Exit Interview
September 30, 2009Parity: noun 1.equality, as in amount, status, or character.
Parody: noun 6. a poor or feeble imitation or semblance; travesty
I had a thought the other day while driving and listening to Colin Cowherd. The NFL, as Cowherd pointed out, is designed for the entire league to go 8-8. The draft is heavily slanted for those that were weak the previous year. Free agency is such that teams can turn around their franchises in a year or two. That does happen, just not in Cleveland. The schedules are even slanted so that you play teams that were around your same level the previous year. That’s why the Browns find themselves playing the Raiders, Texans and Bills every year like they were in our division.
Despite all of that, we know that the Browns continue to defy the odds and finish under the Mendoza line of 8-8. Why do the Browns finish so poorly? The obvious reason to Browns fans is poor management. Poor drafting, poor talent development, and poor in-game coaching have left this team mired in the mess that it is. But here’s a question- if the league tries hard to establish this parity, why have we recently had a 16-0 team and a 0-16 team? Both the Patriots and Lions managed to do something that no other team had done in a 16 game season, and were thought of as nearly impossible to do with the way the league is set up now. Is Bill Belicheck really that great of a head coach? Were the Lions reaping the seeds of all those bad Matt Millen decisions? Maybe.
Perhaps the parity the league tried to create really just allows the cream to rise to the top easier. Think about the best franchises in the game for a minute. The Patriots have been the model of consistency this decade. Even when their all-world QB is injured in week one they still manage to win 11 games. They have gone through running backs like an elementary school kid grows through shoes. Still they keep winning. They are robbed of their coordinators every other year. Still they keep winning. How about the Steelers? They lost their head coach and maintained their identity as a team. They don’t compete in the free agent market, losing big names every few years. Still they keep winning. Baltimore may have had a drought on offense for a spell, but they kept replacing important pieces on that dominant defense and still manage to win.
The problem in Cleveland is that our team is a parody. They are a sitcom punchline. A cheap imitation of an actual football team. A string of terrible decisions and unfulfilled potential. This may be the worst Browns team I’ve ever seen. It isn’t the least talented Browns team ever, but it is probably the worst. Will they go 0-16? I don’t think so, but perhaps since the Lions broke through the stink barrier last season more teams will believe it’s possible and find themselves winless. Kind of like the 4 minute mile. Now we know it’s possible.
20 Comments
“The Patriots have been the model of consistency this decade. Even when their all-world QB is injured in week one they still manage to win 11 games.”
Because they somehow manage to squeeze years out of guys that prior teams were done with (Harrison, Seau, Fred Taylor, etc) and turn linebackers (Bruschi) into TEs that catch more TD passes than anyone we’ve had outside of Winslow… Among other things…
Vrabel, not Bruschi was the Pats TE in goal line situations.
I don’t get the point of this post, other then the cute homonym. Everyone knows that the Browns (and Bengals and Raiders, etc.) suck year after year. Everyone knows that despite the cap, the Steelers, Pats, Cowboys, and Giants are good year after year.
The question is why? What part of the management are we not doing right? Mangini was fired after going roughly .500 for the Jets. Now his team is pitiful, because they’re the Browns. The Browns are always the team who can hold you to ten points when they score seven, and put up 35 when the other team has 38.
THOSE are the things that need answering.
people still listen to cowhead? wow…not sure which is more shocking, that or the how bad the browns organization is.
On a happier note: Cleveland runs ESPN right now. 3 of their “Headlines” involve 3 different Cleveland sports teams.
The easy answer is the failure of ownership to establish a winning culture. Randy Lerner has never tried to do this. Mangini is finally making an effort, and people want to run him out of town after 3 weeks. It’s ridiculous. DK has been right on about this.
Also, the “Mangini had a .500 record in New York” thing is misleading, though technically true. It’s more reflective of what he did there to note that he had two 10-win seasons. Also look at what the structure he established is doing now.
Clearly planning evaluation and leadership are some of the factors that will swing the “average” of one team higher or lower. Steelers, Pats, etc have it. Bengals, Lions, Browns, etc don’t.
All the teams you mentioned have good lines. When people are blocking it’s easy to run and you have time to throw. I don’t understand why this is still so underrated by the media.
Also, the strength of schedule based off your record is highly overrated. Only 2 games are decided by your previous record and those teams aren’t necessarily as good/bad as they were the year before. The 2 division matchups selected any year (7 games) matter so much more.
/not sure if I ever had a point
@5
Ha haaaaa! Same thing on SI.com
@#6:
Also, the “Mangini had a .500 record in New York” thing is misleading, though technically true. It’s more reflective of what he did there to note that he had two 10-win seasons. Also look at what the structure he established is doing now.
While I’m not a total Mangini lover (or bunker dweller, despite Isis’s insistences) I’ve said this same thing several times here and it seems to escape the minds of those who want to fire him already.
What those teams Rick mentioned do is NOT PANIC AFTER ONE ROUGH YEAR. They have a system and a long-term plan, and they stick to it. While it’s true that New England gets a lot out of guys other teams cut, they (and Pittsburgh, as well) aren’t afraid to let people walk, either. Why? Because they believe in their system from top to bottom and know there is going to be someone to step into that person’s shoes.
I don’t disagree with the idea that FA allows teams to make quick turnarounds, but how viable are those turn-arounds long term? I know Cleveland is starved of winning of almost any kind, but is it worth it to have one good year at the expense of the long term (think: Florida Marlins)? Beyond that, Cleveland was not a team/roster that was primed for one of those Miami-esque quick turnarounds: they play in a tough division, and their roster was completely devoid of talent at 75-80% of the positions, and depth in basically 100% of the positions. In addition to THAT, look at Miami now. They’re back to 0-3. Hope it was worth it.
Whether you think Mangini’s “system” and “plan” are right or wrong (and I suspect I know how most people feel, here), to say “Fire him!” after three games, whether you’ll admit it or not, contributes to the problem more than it helps.
OK, maybe one 9 win season and one 10 win season…but still.
Agreed, DP.
said Mangini. “Derek did some things that were positive and that’s what it’s based on.”
are you efffin kidding me? what’s wrong w this guy?
just play brady and tell him he HAS TO attempt some deeper passes.
@9: Typically, I would always agree with the “do not panic after one year – it hurts more than it helps” credo.
But this time around, I feel like it is patently clear it won’t work out. We’ve never heard things like $1,700 fines for water bottles, “voluntary” bus rides, agents allegedly telling their free-agent clients to steer clear of Cleveland, etc.
We’ve been bad before. We’ve had terrible coaches and front offices before. But we’ve never had anything the likes of this. This is the one time I would advocate cutting bait asap.
“Free agency is such that teams can turn around their franchises in a year or two. That does happen, just not in Cleveland. The schedules are even slanted so that you play teams that were around your same level the previous year.”
only 2 games a year have anything to do with your record the previous year. 14/16 games are the same as the rest of your division regardless of record.
where are the instant turnaround FA’s you speak of? FA isn’t what it used to be….
@5
I saw that as well, including the top 2! Although go figure it was the Indians and Browns’ stories, not our prized organization.
Maybe they will drop ESPNCleveland on us? Repent, for the apocalypse is nigh!…whatever the eff that means…
Thanks about Vrabel – I knew that, just misspoke. Much appreciated.
@9
While I agree that any long-term overhaul needs time (by definition) to play out before it can be judged, this isn’t a knee-jerk reaction by fans. We’ve been fed bad football for over a decade, and we’re just plain tired of waiting for THIS year’s “change of culture” to take hold. I think, had Mangini given us anything positive to latch onto, anything at all, we would’ve taken it gladly and urged patience.
I think the larger problem is that we, as Browns fans, have utterly lost faith in the organization as a whole. I don’t know if I’m onboard the movement to petition Lerner to sell the team, but something drastic needs to happen at the top before I’ll feel good about the direction this team is taking. There was some talk in the media after last season about hiring someone to be a Parcell’s type “Football Czar” to turn things around. Alas, Lerner went with a weird interview process, hired a just-released head coach with Patriots roots, and let the coach pick the GM. This does not seem to be the pattern those consistent teams take.
Mangini feels too much like “more of the same,” maybe because he’s Lerner’s second try. I’d like him more, I think, if it appeared at all that Lerner had learned something from his first try at picking a head coach/GM combination.
Mangini has made a horrible mistake in not only putting DA in last week, but calling him up to start this week. As it’s been stated all over the net, Peyton Manning went 3-13 his first season with the Colts. He went 13-3 in his second. I can’t believe that folks on here actually expected an overnight change in this team. It’s going to take time for Quinn to get his feel for this team (I’ll give you that the whole “controversy” should’ve been nipped in camp) and Mangini to implement what he needs to turn this team around. It doesn’t matter who we put in there to coach. Would we be calling for Cowher’s head after these same 3 weeks? It’s this society norm of instant gratification that is going to keep our Browns at the bottom of the barrel for another decade if we don’t give someone a CHANCE longer than 3 weeks.
The only time “The draft is heavily slanted for those that were weak the previous year” is when there are truly great players in that draft. I know it sounds obvious but, more times than not, the lousy teams have to pay huge salaries to top 5 picks that aren’t that good. If you get a peyton manning, great. if you get a tim couch, you just took a cap hit for a guy not worth it.
I think the draft is actually slanted to help the teams at the end of the first round. you can still get good talent and not have to ruin your cap position to do it.
I agree with Chuck. We do need to give Mangini a chance. We are going to have the same results every year if we don’t give someone a chance.
I do have one problem with Mangini, and that’s waiting for him to realize that he’s not Belicheck, so quit acting like he is. He may want to be, and I’m all for him bringing Belicheck-type sucess to Cleveland, but just because he learned from the man, doesn’t mean he needs to try to be a mirror image of him.
Let’s give Mangini a chance, and he’s to Mangini giving Quinn a chance.
As always, great post Rick… RIGHT SIDE!