STLsportBlog Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 As you guys know, Shurmur is the front runner for HC in Cleveland. As a Rams fan, I can say that he has some good things to offer, but overall I would not be too thrilled. He was really Bradford's key mentor, and helped Bradford play at a high level for a rookie. So if his job is to do that with McCoy, then I think he will do a decent job. Even if he doesn't pan out as a head-coach, if can successfully develop a young QB that can lead your team for the next decade, then the experiment is somewhat successful even if he eventually fails as a coach. The Good- He was able to AT TIMES get a lot out of a little with the Rams. They had some weapons: Bradford, S.Jackson, Amendola, Danario Alexander (unavailable most of the year), and Mike Hoomanawanui (you probably haven't heard of him yet, but he is a player). But even so, they lacked any real threat at receiver, and Shurmur got the offense to over-perform. The Bad- If he was in charge of the offensive play calling (and he was), he was way to conservative. He frequently tried to sit on small first half leads, and ride it out for the rest of the game. It lost the team a hand full of games, which means it ultimately lost them the playoffs. His play calling was also very frustrating. If he calls plays for Cleveland the way did here, have fun seeing only one or two 15+ yard passes a game. And have fun watching him run the ball on 3rd and long (even if a first down wins the game). Overall, he has some good things to offer. But I wouldn't be too excited if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClevelandBigDawg Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Thanks for the input. I dont like the "conservative" thing. That was one thing most people didn't like about Mangini, and I know Ohio State fans hate about Jim Tressel. I want a guy that wants to go up by 40 and then let that ride, not someone who goes up by ten and tries to run the clock out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 God please don't let him be the front runner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mdouty Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Hey guys, I'm a Rams fan too. I wouldn't worry about him being conservative. Reporters have been saying that our head coach Steve Spagnuolo made Shurmur stay conservative because of his philosophy. If he was completely calling the shots, I think the play calling would have been much different. Everything I've heard from him as been good and if you hire him, I think you'll all be very happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LCDawgFan13 Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Well, I've come to the conclusion that Shurmur is the likely new Browns coach, unless Gruden makes himself available. The good news is that Shurmur will have to hire an OC also. So, if he is in fact very conservative, with any luck his OC won't be...and Shurmur won't be calling the plays. Hopefully, he won't retain our current OC. We know what he is capable of, and I don't know of anyone that wants him back. I do hope that whoever comes in as HC retains Ryan as our DC. That defense is only lacking a pass rush. I think our DB's show their true talent once some of the pressure is taken off and the front 7 gets some pressure on the QB. Whatever happens, I'm sure this offseason will be very interesting and is sure to be full of controversy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I despise "over" conservative coaching, you either have the iron balls that a champion coach has or you have clay balls like fisher and run an above average but never elite operation even with outstanding elite talent or you have no balls like mangini and you cant but barely hope to break the 8-8 mark.. Honestly of all the candidates thusfar i like perry fewell better than the others, i suspect his offense would be aggressive even though he is a defensive minded coach.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownsKidd Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 And don't we all think that Holmgren will advise of what he wants out of his coaching staff and team. When you interview for a job, you are told the expectations and responsibilities of that said position. But I would think that a new coach would have some expectations of the type of offense that Holmgren wants to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepwrite Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Shefter thinks Holmgren wants to hire a guy he can mentor and teach, someone from inside "the family," and Shurmur fits that to a tee. Holmgren will be significantly more involved this year. About him being conservative in St. Louis: Duh. He had a stud running back, a rookie QB, and no WRs. Even so, Bradford had an 18/14 ratio because he's a rookie. Unleashed? He throws 25 picks. It worked. The Rams finished 7-9 and could have won the division. He did the right thing. Yes, word is that Spags wanted Shurmur to protect Bradford as the Jets protected Sanchez down the stretch last year... and I agree with both of them, as grating as it can be. Now Shurmur will be working for Holmgren, who says he wants "more pizzazz." The challenge will be different, to enliven a flat offense. Shurmur is not only a WCO guy... he's a Holmgren WCO guy, as quarterback coach under Andy Reid for 8 years, who learned the offense directly from Holmgren. THAT'S the offense you'll see from the Browns, the one run in Green Bay, Philadelphia, and Seattle, the Holmgren WCO. That's what the Walrus wants and that's what he'll get. Any notions that Holmgren won't "meddle" are bullshit and we should be happy for it. He's Mike Holmgren and at least for a couple years, Shurmur will operate as an extension of him. It makes perfect sense. And I won't be shocked if Gil Haskell is the OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 Shurmur is not only a WCO guy... he's a Holmgren WCO guy, as quarterback coach under Andy Reid for 8 years, who learned the offense directly from Holmgren. THAT'S the offense you'll see from the Browns, the one run in Green Bay, Philadelphia, and Seattle, the Holmgren WCO. That's what the Walrus wants and that's what he'll get. That's all fine and dandy if we are hiring him for OC. I am of the opinion that you hire a young OC to be HC if he "lights out" coaches his ass off and gets players rocking some top 10-15 numbers. His offense leaves a lot to be desired. If Holmgren wants to mentor the kid, hire him as OC, coach the team yourself, show the kid the ropes that way, and if warranted hand over the keys to him after 3-4 years. HC? Par Shurmur? Have we lost our minds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepwrite Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 That's all fine and dandy if we are hiring him for OC. I am of the opinion that you hire a young OC to be HC if he "lights out" coaches his ass off and gets players rocking some top 10-15 numbers. His offense leaves a lot to be desired. If Holmgren wants to mentor the kid, hire him as OC, coach the team yourself, show the kid the ropes that way, and if warranted hand over the keys to him after 3-4 years. HC? Par Shurmur? Have we lost our minds? It's a pretty Mike Smith or John Harbaugh kind of hire. It certainly isn't playing to the cheap seats... but it's the plan Holmgren is bringing to the table. He and Heckert obviously know Shurmur well, he interviewed great, and they see a head coach when they look at him. They're betting their jobs on it, basically. Holmgren is making the Browns his team. He will NOT be hands off. I'm betting Shurmur is head coach and Fox is DC... but Holmgren will be the final word on just about everything. For a couple years, I see Shurmur operating as an extension of Holmgren... then the training wheels come off. I'm good with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RugbyDawg Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 I just hate that there's basically no info out there about this guy... I youtubed him and no joke this came up on the first page of hits: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1Ur-h5E2xw I get a bad feeling heading into this next chapter of Browns football... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawg08 Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 As you guys know, Shurmur is the front runner for HC in Cleveland. As a Rams fan, I can say that he has some good things to offer, but overall I would not be too thrilled. He was really Bradford's key mentor, and helped Bradford play at a high level for a rookie. So if his job is to do that with McCoy, then I think he will do a decent job. Even if he doesn't pan out as a head-coach, if can successfully develop a young QB that can lead your team for the next decade, then the experiment is somewhat successful even if he eventually fails as a coach. The Good- He was able to AT TIMES get a lot out of a little with the Rams. They had some weapons: Bradford, S.Jackson, Amendola, Danario Alexander (unavailable most of the year), and Mike Hoomanawanui (you probably haven't heard of him yet, but he is a player). But even so, they lacked any real threat at receiver, and Shurmur got the offense to over-perform. The Bad- If he was in charge of the offensive play calling (and he was), he was way to conservative. He frequently tried to sit on small first half leads, and ride it out for the rest of the game. It lost the team a hand full of games, which means it ultimately lost them the playoffs. His play calling was also very frustrating. If he calls plays for Cleveland the way did here, have fun seeing only one or two 15+ yard passes a game. And have fun watching him run the ball on 3rd and long (even if a first down wins the game). Overall, he has some good things to offer. But I wouldn't be too excited if I were you. Shurmur sounds alot like Mangenious!! NOT GOOD!! But nothing surprises me with this organization anymore!! Can we ever hire a proven head coach. I'm tired of this team hiring lousy hasbeen headcoaches or assistant headcoaches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 On channel 3 news, they said tonight that it was Shurmur - they expect to have a contract done by Friday, and making an announcement on Saturday. I hope Ryan stays, I want to see his defense when it has a few more pieces in place... But if Ryan leaves to be a hc, Fewell would be a great DC... This should be interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 Shefter thinks Holmgren wants to hire a guy he can mentor and teach, someone from inside "the family," and Shurmur fits that to a tee. Holmgren will be significantly more involved this year. About him being conservative in St. Louis: Duh. He had a stud running back, a rookie QB, and no WRs. Even so, Bradford had an 18/14 ratio because he's a rookie. Unleashed? He throws 25 picks. It worked. The Rams finished 7-9 and could have won the division. He did the right thing. Yes, word is that Spags wanted Shurmur to protect Bradford as the Jets protected Sanchez down the stretch last year... and I agree with both of them, as grating as it can be. Now Shurmur will be working for Holmgren, who says he wants "more pizzazz." The challenge will be different, to enliven a flat offense. Shurmur is not only a WCO guy... he's a Holmgren WCO guy, as quarterback coach under Andy Reid for 8 years, who learned the offense directly from Holmgren. THAT'S the offense you'll see from the Browns, the one run in Green Bay, Philadelphia, and Seattle, the Holmgren WCO. That's what the Walrus wants and that's what he'll get. Any notions that Holmgren won't "meddle" are bullshit and we should be happy for it. He's Mike Holmgren and at least for a couple years, Shurmur will operate as an extension of him. It makes perfect sense. And I won't be shocked if Gil Haskell is the OC. And with the playoffs on the line, a stud running back....rookie qb...no Wr....against a Seattle defense weak against the run, he runs 11 times and passes 36. Conservative? Maybe.....completely stupid? Definitely. If u liked dabs, ur gonna love this genius What were u saying again..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shepwrite Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 And with the playoffs on the line, a stud running back....rookie qb...no Wr....against a Seattle defense weak against the run, he runs 11 times and passes 36. Conservative? Maybe.....completely stupid? Definitely. If u liked dabs, ur gonna love this genius What were u saying again..... Huh? Two things you need to mix into your thinking before you formulate an opinion: 1. Shurmur was NOT in charge. Spags was. I've read that Spags wanted the offense to be conservative to protect the rookie. 2. Holmgren and Heckert obviously like Shurmur quite a bit more than Daboll. Holmgren has said he wants more pizzazz and would call a game differently than Daboll. Are you suggesting that Holmgren has changed his mind? Or that Pat Shurmur is mentally incapable of doing anything but safe and dull, even though Philadelphia and McNabb were anything but? What were u saying again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.