Cribbs Cleans Out Locker, Says Goodbyes
January 8, 2010Mangini Stays: Tips of the Hat / Wags of the Finger
January 8, 2010One week ago, it appeared that Eric Mangini was prepping his exit interview. One month ago, many were shocked that he was even allowed on the premesis in Berea. Be that as it may, Mike Holmgren has opted to keep Eric Mangini and (most of) his staff for the 2010 season.
But what about all of the talk regarding the differences in philosophy? What about the clashing egos? And the fact that there is not even a general manager in place? Why would Holmgren want to give Eric Mangini another year of what was sub-par football for much of the 2009 season?
Well, thats where the theories come in. Perhaps it was one main reason, but there are a handful of variables that play into the retention decision that was handed down yesterday afternoon.
Given that, let us all take a look into what reasoning – in no particular order – would have been given had the Browns not decided to not hold a press conference to discuss the move…
Money
Sure, Randal Randolph D. Lerner could make it rain on Pacman Jones and Lil John in consecutive evenings. However, having three head coaches under contract in one season is not the most sound of financial decisions. Factor in Phil Savage and Rob Chudzinski, and the number of paychecks being cut each week would start reaching epic proportions. Remember, it would not just be Eric Mangini getting money for the next three seasons; his entire staff (if relieved of their respective duties) would be on the payroll as well.
Uncertainty beyond 2010
While it is rarely mentioned during a CBS or Fox broadcast, there is no guarantee that we have NFL football to watch in 2011. In fact, a lockout is looking more and more likely with each passing day. Almost as a tie-in to the variable above, if there is no guarantee of football in 2011, the Browns could be facing three head coaches on the payroll during a year when NO ONE is working. Even if the likelihood of a lockout is slim, the magnitude of the possible downside did not justify the risk.
There were no other “big” names to hire
Last season, there were plenty of big-named free agent head coaches relieved of their duties. While most of them are still technically “free,” those like Bill Cowher and Jon Gruden have said that they would prefer to stay in their current positions for at least another year. With the apparent mind set of putting together a “super group” of coaches and front office employees, the names Steve Mariucci and Marty Mornhinweg do not exactly sound like upgrades over the current situation.
Holmgren could return to the sidelines
Mike Holmgren has gone on record to say that he is not coaching “this season.” One quick look at the schedule for 2010 and it may be in his best interest to stay in his presidential desk chair. Bodog.com has already put out early over/unders for win totals and have given the Cleveland Browns a record of 5-11 for next season. Aside from the normal AFC North opponents (twice), Cleveland will face New England, the New York Jets, New Orleans, Atlanta, and Carolina – each finishing at least .500 in 2009. If Holmgren were to bring in his own guy and sacrifice him to a possible rough season (possibly without 2009’s biggest weapon), then what would he do? This way, if he chooses to put on the headset again, the stepping stones would be in place.
The Fraternity of Head Coaches
Holmgren has repeatedly said that he’s not a fan of giving guys one year to prove their head coaching skills. As Adam Schefter said yesterday, it is almost to the point where Eric Mangini is underrated as a head coach due to the media and his perceived sub-par communication skills. Another year, perhaps one without the “FIRE THIS GUY” distractions may give the head coach just what he needs to prove that his system works. It should help matters a bit when figuring in the lack of distractions that will be eased by having an actual GM as well. Given that, giving him another season to prove his worth could wind up being the underdog-feel-good story of the year if Mangini can build off of his finish in 2009. Which leads to…
Evident progress
The 2009 Browns overcame a 1-11 start to finish with four straight wins. They did so with the bulk of their starters from week 1 either traded or injured. Sure, the schedule was considerably lighter come week 13, but no team had more players that made you scratch your head when viewing the name plate sewn on to the back of the jersey. Moore? Roth? Bernard? Hey, they may have not been All-Pros by any stretch, but they got the job done. Sure, this 2009 Browns were last in the league in total yards, but they were also 10-6 against the spread! Oh, and the win over Pittsburgh didn’t hurt things either.
**
Perhaps it was one of the above. Perhaps Eric Mangini has the greatest interviewing skills known to man and was able to sell the last (but not least) point mentioned. Perhaps is was a concoction of all of the above thrown into a Brown and Orange Magic Bullet, only to be poured out into a salsa dish come August 2010. Either way, Browns fans now have one more box of uncertainty checked off on the off-season sheet of wonder.
—
(AP Photo/ David Zalubowski)
48 Comments
All of the above would seem to be reasonable possibilites well done. Like I said in an earlier comment I’m reserving judgment at this time. Lets see what happens before we all overreact like normal Clevelanders, please. I have to believe that Holmgren has an idea and knows what he’s doing otherwise what was the point in hiring him as team President. I could see how people wanted Mangini gone given he was 1-11 before he was 4-0 personally I never cared for the guy but who knows maybe if all he has to do is coach and Holmgren and the new GM handle the personnel we could have a perfect marriage. Lets hope anyways.
^^^Btw FIRST – LoL sorry I had to…I see people making this ludicrous comment all over the Internet and well, I just wanna fit in! GO BROWNS!
An intentional “First!” comment in the 2nd comment of a thread.. I have now seen it all. The internet never ceases to amaze me!
(Kidding of course)
I think the 2011 lockout has quite a bit to do with it; it sure seems like not a lot of people fan-wise realize that there is a chance of no NFL after this upcoming season.
Sure, Randal Lerner could make it rain on Pacman Jones and Lil John in consecutive evenings.
That one is also sexual.
/Quagmire’d
In all seriousness, I think another reason is that it gives Holmgren insurance/insulation against failure next year. If things go badly, he can say, “Well, we tried it. Now its time to clean house on the coaching staff and do it completely my way.” It gives Holmgren a scape goat for next year if the team spins its wheels.
boogeyman – seriously? Don’t start that junk here. I like to think of this is the ‘finer things club’ of the internet. Don’t cheapen it.
I don’t see why the last category isn’t listed as the first.
Evident progress.
The rest is just speculation and intrigue.
^^^What, are you serious? I believe I sanctioned myself in my very own comment thank you very much Denny! Man, people can be rough hiding anonymously behind a keyboard. Kidding. Anyways I forgot about that 2011 lockout thing, good point. I wonder if Josh Cribbs and his people thought about that maybe that is part of the reason he wants a Brinks truck delivery NOW! Anyways I’m hoping Holmgren has a press conference because I’d like to hear from him on his decision to not only keep Mangini but virtually his entire staff.
So, what is (if there is any) the real news on the assistant coaches. Some sources are saying “all” of the coaching staff will be retained even though at least the receivers coach is already going elsewhere (thank goodness for that). Other sources are saying there is no official word of assistants being retained. Even other sources are saying Ryan will be retained. It all seems like conjecture beyond the head coach position. Any thoughts?
@6: Speculation and intrigue are right up your alley!
Frowns- Do you happen to drive a Dodge Stratus?
Randal Lerner?
Who’s that? The guy that owns the Browns is Randolph.
Seriously, Scott. It’s a Cleveland sports blog. We should know the owners’ names.
How about Holmgren feels that Mangini’s “process” is actually working and that he gives the Browns the best chance to win next season.
I get that a lot of fans have bought into the bias that the media obviously has for Mangini, (Most of that having nothing to do with actual football or coaching.) but really, now we have to rationalize a reason that he’s sticking around.
Holmgren is a smart guy who obviously knows the game of football. We only get what the media gives us in regards to Mangini, but maybe he and the players see that Mangini can actually coach.
@Denny: “Did you even read the book, boogeyman? Who’s the protaganist?”
Re Mangini’s apparently astonishing interviewing skills, it’s simple. As an egomaniacal martinet, he’s also an accomplished slavish toady. Flip side of one personality. “What time is Show getting to Berea tomorrow – 9:00? I’ll be there at 8:00, no 7:00, straightening his office, just how he likes it.” Never underestimate how much a huge ego like Holms loves a good toady.
@ milton – Sometimes people knowingly write things incorrectly. I do this all the time, for humorous effects.
“Seriously, Scott. It’s a Cleveland sports blog. We should know the owners’ names.”
Fixed. Thanks for picking a grammatical error instead of commenting about the content of the post. Really builds the community.
“I don’t see why the last category isn’t listed as the first.”
Probably because I said “in no particular order.”
How about Holmgren feels that Mangini’s “process” is actually working and that he gives the Browns the best chance to win next season.
As compared to what, though? We don’t know what candidates–if any–may have been of interest to Holmgren and whether or not he could get them here. Not sayin’, just sayin’.
now we have to rationalize a reason that he’s sticking around.
Absolutely. Or, did you not watch the first 12 games?
I just thought you were referring to Randal “Pink” Floyd from Dazed and Confused. Maybe we could pick him up, I think they had a pretty good shot at state his Senior year.
You’d do it for Randolph Scott…
[chorus] RAN-DOLPH SCOTT!!!
I may play ball, jack, but I will NEVER sign THAT.
Scott, that is an excellent analysis, mercifully devoid of wacko conspiracy theories. Great job.
@7 Hey, boogeyman, way to nail Denny Mayo for hiding “anonymously” behind a keyboard. Sheesh.
I drive a Honda Accord, the color is “desert” and it has Browns plates. Am I missing a joke about a Dodge Stratus?
Don’t forget Randal Graves.
Frowns, it’s long, but watch:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/3526/saturday-night-live-family-dinner
[…] touched on some of the perceived reasoning for Mangini’s hanging around for one more year. Now, let’s look at the possible benefits or […]
“When BrownsFans Attack!”
The Cribbs thing has us all grouchy.
Anyway what’s all the fuss about… I thought our owner was Randolph Duke with his silent brother Mortimer.
Can we get DP to tee up more Quagmire quotes (which made me laugh out loud)?
I’m hijacking to give props to the winners of the WFNY Last Man Standing Pool — ME.. and others. Special acclaim to Mr. C for picking the Browns in the last week. Big balls my friend! Can we get a Gridiron Challenge pool going for the playoffs?
And Scott, I found your analysis prescient.
“Thanks for picking a grammatical error instead of commenting about the content of the post.”
You’re welcome, Scott. I figure if you’re communicating in a written medium, it’s important to get it right.
“Really builds the community.”
Not sure what that means, but it seems you have a real passive-aggressive tendency and don’t like me very much, in light of our exchange in the other thread.
@ milty – Scott just had a kumbaya moment on the other article, so can’t we clear it up and sip fizzy-pop sodas together and be bestest friends?
Funny that someone who corrected a minute detail in the context of the post at large in a snide manner would have the rocks to call someone else passive-aggressive.
@26, Thanks, Jimbo, and congrats to you too!
“Funny that someone who corrected a minute detail in the context of the post at large in a snide manner would have the rocks to call someone else passive-aggressive.”
Really? I didn’t think calling it out front and center was passive at all.
Snide, I’ll grant you. My ire was up over the exchange in the other thread. It’s a pet peeve of mine, though… I figure if you’re putting your words out there for the whole world to see, it’s worth taking pride in getting details right. You’ve got a good thing going here, a nice community and a good little business, I’m sure, with the potential for some nice financial prospects down the road. It’s not easy to build a successful web community/business–so have pride in your work. That’s all.
Well, please remember that ALL of us have actual full-time jobs, and there are times when we are rushing simply to get content posted every hour whist not getting fired from our endeavors that acutally pay our bills.
This is not to say we publish filler just publish filler; it’s more of me asking pretty please with sugar on top that you give us a little benefit of the doubt on mistakenly calling Randy Lerner “Randall” instead of “Randolph”.
And, unless your name is technically milton and you look like a red stapler, the Internet by its very mechanism provides a bit of “passive aggression” because you’re technically still hiding. It’s like leaving a note on your office refrigerator asking people to clean up their spilled pop.
So I guess Clown Baby won’t be inviting me to dinner any time soon? Should I be bummed about this?
Sign I haven’t been in Ohio much: I haven’t heard the word “pop” in a long, long time.
I’ve heard that babies made of clowns make a fantastic strudel. You might be bummed about that, Frowns.
@#5 Denny – “Aside from sleeping with men, I think the “Finer Things Club” is the gayest thing about me” – Oscar, “The Office”
Fair enough, DP.
But I will take exception to the avatar/handle passive-aggressive example. I’d say it’s completely irrelevant, considering that’s the only way to communicate here, and everyone is in the same position. Of course, I’m also making the assumption that you’re not really Romeo Crennel trying to go incognito with the initials DP here, either. 😉
@DP “This is not to say we publish filler just publish filler” – you forgot the word “to” in between “just” and “publish.” This egregious two letter slight has just cost you one reader. GOOD DAY SIR!
“My ire was up over the exchange in the other thread. ”
…Which is something I believe is cleared up. By all means, feel free to email me otherwise, I don’t want to bog down the comments with bickering.
I’m not (mmm… delicious hoagie), but I never claimed to not be passive-aggressive, either. I’m quite!
Absolutely, Scott–it’s all good.
Now that we got all of that cleared up I think it’s time to move onto more important topics.
..
…
Where the heck has Isis been lately?
“Where the heck has Isis been lately?”
Was he banned during the site upgrade? 😉
I’m curious… were Isis and RandyOSU the same guy?
It took time, but “The Randolph” has stuck. Awesome.
My theory on Isis is a new identity. Are there any suspects? Any new faces show up here after Isis disappeared?
Why ya care?
“My theory on Isis is a new identity. Are there any suspects? Any new faces show up here after Isis disappeared?”
*glances towards Denny..*
Is that REALLY you?
hey WFNY – I believe you meant to say Benard – as in Marcus Benard, not Bernard…
🙂
http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/player.php?id=3824