Earl34 Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 and Belichick won three super bowls this decade and a lot of playoff games with and without Mangini You win dumbidioicy rules Your statement is true but by that logic we should also consider that Belichick hasn't won a Super Bowl since Mangini left. Mangini was part of all three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brnfan16 Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 Just pathetic, conservative play calling. Should of went for it down there! Nothing to lose and kicks the FG! This team has looked pathetic the last 2 weeks against not one 2 win team, but two and there is no excuse for it! Bungles hadn't won since Sept.! Just freakin sad! I'm with you dawg08. A team that can knock off the world champs (at their house), knock off Brady and the Pats and then play two of the worst teams in the NF fu*k'n L and fall flat on their faces. This coach needs to get back to coaching high school. His time here will just be a footnote of some of the worst coaches in Browns history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 Your statement is true but by that logic we should also consider that Belichick hasn't won a Super Bowl since Mangini left. Mangini was part of all three. I already told him that ... can't tell him anything once he hits the sauce. Zombo --I guess we shouldn't pick on the elderly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longhorn Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 Has anyone ever won a Superbowl without Mangini? Just asking because he sounds soooo freakin' awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck The Frowns Posted December 29, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 We live in a whole different era, as some one has already pointed out. You can not compare those days to now.. Back then, there wasnt as good as scouting, or college athletes playing football. Its like comparing Porn back then to porn now Wonder if Santonio is related to John C? One had a long one, the other IS one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich4eagle Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 Since you love the Stoolers so much then explain how they won the SB with an average at best offense. Your crazy if you don't think the Stoolers won purely on defense. The Steelers do not have an average offense. They play the game in a strategy that takes advantage of one of the best defenses in football. Thus not a lot of high scoring games but since Ben arrived it has defensive breakdowns that caused most of their losses. The never won the Bowl with all those dominant teams until Ben showed up. They won with Ben and Bettis and Ward. Then they won with Ben and Ward and Holmes. I forgot that the defense drove the ball 92 yards in the last two minutes to beat Arizona. Further the winning points average in the Super Bowl is 31. That says the whatever defense got teams to the Super Bowl got snockered by GREAT Offense. And great offense requires a franchise QB. It is all documented. The smart folks like Belichick understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich4eagle Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 The more realistic news on the Niners (it'll be Harbaugh): http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...ers-candidates/ Eddie is getting into the decision making in the background and advising Jed. Maybe, I will have to ask Candy to come to the owners box for a game since I have had a standing invitation from her for a number of years that happened before Eddie got in trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bringbackbrownie2 Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 The Steelers do not have an average offense. They play the game in a strategy that takes advantage of one of the best defenses in football. Thus not a lot of high scoring games but since Ben arrived it has defensive breakdowns that caused most of their losses. This is what I disagree with.. To win a Super Bowl, a team must have a good offense and a good defense, with few exceptions. The steelers offense is good, but their defense is great. Saying that their offense is more talented than their defense is rediculous... The never won the Bowl with all those dominant teams until Ben showed up. They won with Ben and Bettis and Ward. Then they won with Ben and Ward and Holmes. I forgot that the defense drove the ball 92 yards in the last two minutes to beat Arizona. Again, the steelers never won the super bowl with good defenses before because their offense was NOT good.. they were just average. So with your logic, the defense would only be responsible for winning games if the game ended on a pick 6?!! I could just as easily argue that Super Bowl was won because Harrison intercepted Warner to end the second half.. It was a point swing of 10-14 pts... Further the winning points average in the Super Bowl is 31. That says the whatever defense got teams to the Super Bowl got snockered by GREAT Offense. And great offense requires a franchise QB. It is all documented. The smart folks like Belichick understand. My point is that no team wins a Super Bowl without a great defense. Lets look at the past 10 Super Bowls: 2001: Trent Dilfer! and the Ravens won the super bowl. The defense had 4 interceptions and accounted for 14 of the points= defense. 2002: Patriots win with 2 INTs and a pick 6= defense 2003: Tampa Bay wins and had 5 INTs, 3 pick 6s (now ask how they got 48 points-all offense right?)= defense 2004: you could agree pro offense in this one, the team with the ball last was going to win on this day. although kasay putting the kickoff out of bounds killed the panthers in this one= offense. 2005: Patriots win. 3 INTS the difference in a close game= defense. 2006: Pitt wins. Held seattle to 10 pts despits losing the turnover battle (and help from the zebras)= defense (refs included) 2007: Colts win. 2 INTS and a pick 6. Biggest difference- BOB SANDERS! He was actually healthy this year. How many Super Bowls has Manning won without him?= defense. 2008: Giants win a close one. They harrassed Tom Brady and had 5 sacks. Held the patriots offense to only 14 points despite being huge underdogs.= defense. 2009: Steelers win. I stated this earlier, the turning pt was Harrison's big pick 6 to end the half. The steelers defense had a terrible 4th quarter but stopped Warner when it mattered most (last 2 minutes).= defense. 2010: Saints win. pick 6 in the 4th quarter sealed the game. The colts again hurt by not having Bob Sanders..= defense 9-1 in favor of defense. I will not argue that a franchise quarterback is damn near essential, but defense ultimately wins championships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownsFan4Evr Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 Mangini Is STAYING! My neighbor just told me! That's about as reliable a "source" as most of the posts I've seen on here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 One of the talking radio heads today said that several coaches who could be in trouble might survive this year because of the player union contract situation. His rational was that teams will not pay two coaches during a year they might not even field a team. I think this does make sense. Do you think it would influence lerner/holmgren after lerner has already paid off a bunch of money after firing people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longhorn Posted December 29, 2010 Report Share Posted December 29, 2010 It could. I think in the Browns case a long lockout might help Mangini. However, Holmgren could always say he's gonna coach and the Browns could save paying out Mangini's contract for next year. That all fits with the Chucky in 2012 other talking heads have stated. I suspect Holmgren and Lerner already know what they're going to do and will work around the lockout, if there is one, whichever way they go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 junkyard dawg: remind never to get on your bad side! i mean it's not even a fair fight anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bringbackbrownie2 Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 It could. I think in the Browns case a long lockout might help Mangini. However, Holmgren could always say he's gonna coach and the Browns could save paying out Mangini's contract for next year. That all fits with the Chucky in 2012 other talking heads have stated. I suspect Holmgren and Lerner already know what they're going to do and will work around the lockout, if there is one, whichever way they go. Absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Yeah, they already know what will happen & the Pburgh game will make no difference. I'm sure that whatever the decision may be, it won't include throwing money out the window. What gets me is the damned media saying we'll know Mangini's future next MONDAY! That may happen, but I would be surprised if their decision is announced that soon. If the decision is to keep him on the payroll due to the CB agreement, we might not know for a LONG time. We'll just have to wait & see. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Do you think it would influence lerner/holmgren after lerner has already paid off a bunch of money after firing people? yes, besides the contracts he already has in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Yeah, they already know what will happen & the Pburgh game will make no difference. I'm sure that whatever the decision may be, it won't include throwing money out the window. What gets me is the damned media saying we'll know Mangini's future next MONDAY! That may happen, but I would be surprised if their decision is announced that soon. If the decision is to keep him on the payroll due to the CB agreement, we might not know for a LONG time. We'll just have to wait & see. Mike Honestly i would be concerned if the decision isnt rendered by monday, whatever their decision there has been plenty of time for holmgren and heckert to evaluate the situation and inform lerner of their decision and if the decision isnt already made than our czar is just another slacker and yet another bad hire by lerner and a waste of my time and hope of ever seeing this team go anywhere but down, however i like others actually think/hope the decision is already made as its not rocket science... And as far as a lockout is concerned, its not going to happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDDawg Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 OK, Mangini may be dead man walking but here's an article written by someone who actually seems to know football, objectively dissecting his moves, team philosophy and direction of the browns. A little long but worth the read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Mangini's only strategy and plan is to try and convince people he can get it done over the next 10 years 2 years at a time...but he cant because he is a fraud, i understand the rational behind the thinking but i recognize how limited mangini's capabilities are and the weaknesses within his stubborn philosophy, every sunday the guys gameplan represents an open book to his opponents and he is just outsmarted in nearly every aspect of the game, people blame it on talent but 50% comes from a lack of good sensible coaching and bad decisions including a bad and corrupted ingenuous system that bottlenecks potential hot/spark players from seeing the field until they are needed due to injury and then they arent prepared..... Keep the weeni fire the weeni i dont care anymore browns football isnt what it use to be even though it never was great at least it was respectable and was ran in a professional manner its just a bad national joke and a never ending fans nightmare now.. Keeping or firing the weeni will both bring great risk to holmgrens integrity and reputation, if we retain the weeni and he gets roasted a 3rd year fans are going to start wanting to eat some roasted feeble minded west coast walrus meat, however the same risk applies to bringing a new coach in and failing even worse or better yet coaching himself into a 3-15 season.. Its a big decision but if im holmgren and know how bad mangini is i fire him and coach myself because there is no way holmgren does as poor a job as mangini when it comes to improvising on the field and winning with what you have... I was a mangini supporter and am a holmgrem supporter but the fact holmgren has done absolutely nothing thusfar on the football end is starting to leave that tainted bad lerner hire taste in my mouth, regardless of which way holmgren goes on mangini if it turns out to be the wrong decision at the end of next year i will be verbally holding lerner responsible and would advise all fans to do so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinny Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Yet Billicheck said that he straight up got outcoached by Mangini Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bringbackbrownie2 Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Mangini's only strategy and plan is to try and convince people he can get it done over the next 10 years 2 years at a time...but he cant because he is a fraud, i understand the rational behind the thinking but i recognize how limited mangini's capabilities are and the weaknesses within his stubborn philosophy, every sunday the guys gameplan represents an open book to his opponents and he is just outsmarted in nearly every aspect of the game, people blame it on talent but 50% comes from a lack of good sensible coaching and bad decisions including a bad and corrupted ingenuous system that bottlenecks potential hot/spark players from seeing the field until they are needed due to injury and then they arent prepared..... Keep the weeni fire the weeni i dont care anymore browns football isnt what it use to be even though it never was great at least it was respectable and was ran in a professional manner its just a bad national joke and a never ending fans nightmare now.. Keeping or firing the weeni will both bring great risk to holmgrens integrity and reputation, if we retain the weeni and he gets roasted a 3rd year fans are going to start wanting to eat some roasted feeble minded west coast walrus meat, however the same risk applies to bringing a new coach in and failing even worse or better yet coaching himself into a 3-15 season.. Its a big decision but if im holmgren and know how bad mangini is i fire him and coach myself because there is no way holmgren does as poor a job as mangini when it comes to improvising on the field and winning with what you have... I was a mangini supporter and am a holmgrem supporter but the fact holmgren has done absolutely nothing thusfar on the football end is starting to leave that tainted bad lerner hire taste in my mouth, regardless of which way holmgren goes on mangini if it turns out to be the wrong decision at the end of next year i will be verbally holding lerner responsible and would advise all fans to do so... With that rationale you would probably want a new owner every year too huh? better yet, if we have a losing season, lets cut everyone in the organization top to bottom- owner down to the last reserve player... Super Bowl here we come!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRREBEL Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Yet Billicheck said that he straight up got outcoached by Mangini Yet randy quaid said that there is a hollywood hitlist that's why he had to go to canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinny Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 Belicheck is a top tier coach Quaid is has been c lister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted December 30, 2010 Report Share Posted December 30, 2010 With that rationale you would probably want a new owner every year too huh? better yet, if we have a losing season, lets cut everyone in the organization top to bottom- owner down to the last reserve player... Super Bowl here we come!!! not only that......pretty soon they won't be satisfied if you don't come out of the gate 4-0. a quarter of the season in and let's fire everybody and start all over again. come on, now that's not only smart, but it's fun too!!! we'll have a clown car (no pun intended) drive up to the stadium every month and out pops the new regime with rubber noses and seltzer water bottles. tell me you wouldn't be there!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRREBEL Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 http://mobile.cleveland.com/advcleve/pm_59...ntguid=HUF3q9yv Id say 50/50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Eric Mangini will be the Head Coach of the Cleveland Browns next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Mangini isnt going anywhere this year, he won 5 games and to most browns fans and our gutless owner and president that is progress....ah hmmm the stuff that champions are made of... As you can tell i dont care either way, i dislike mangini but can live with him as long as someone of class, knowledge and character is running the offense and mangini fuks off of trying to be an offensive guru because he isnt... And if mangini is retained and if he tanks next year im bypassing complaints to holmgren and going straight for llerner because obviously holmgren would have been as bad a hire as mangini, now lets all kick back and prepare to enjoy an improved 6-10 record next year rather mangini is the coach or not.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepwrite Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 On the national level, the LA Times (Farmer) just did an article on hot seat coaches, which of course included. Mangini. Basically said he's probably one who goes because his "grind it out" style doesn't mesh with his boss', who almost certainly wants to run a WCO directed by Colt McCoy. It's probably Holmgren's last window to coach. I'm about 95% certain he's gonna take it. Mangini said he's meeting with Holmgren on Monday and I think he'll be fired soon after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BROWNandORANGE Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 Let's bring this man to Cleveland: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MudratDetector Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 there is a greater chance of mangini being the coach next over holmgren. holmgren wasn't very successful in juggling HC and GM duties in seattle, why would he do the same here with an even more demanding positition like president of football operations. it just doesn't make sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted December 31, 2010 Report Share Posted December 31, 2010 there is a greater chance of mangini being the coach next over holmgren. holmgren wasn't very successful in juggling HC and GM duties in seattle, why would he do the same here with an even more demanding positition like president of football operations. it just doesn't make sense to me. I don't want to see Holmgren coach just because of the fact that he will only be coaching for at most 5 years before he retires. The differeance between here and Seattle is that he is not the GM and he doesn't have to worry about drafting players and signing FA's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.