We need Tom Tupa Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 We have a thread right now started by someone upset that KC could land Shanahan and we couldnt. But KC isnt getting Shanahan. We had threads claiming that Lerner was doing a poor job b/c he hadnt considered the Spags/Philly GM dream team. But then we heard reports that he did (mightve interviewed the Philly guy, I cant remember). People were calling him out for keeping our QB coach around, but then he was replaced. I questioned missing out on Brian Schotty and Weiss, but neither is available.... As more of the chips have fallen into place, Lerner's decisions have looked better not worse. I think it's time to give him some credit. He mightve done a hell of a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eqrulz101 Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I started that thread and I think it holds some merit. Are you telling me that on paper, Pioli and Shanahan are not better then Mangini and Kioknis (sp?)? At the time I made the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal. We have had 10 years of failure with this organization, sorry Im not ready to jump up and down and say that Mangini is our savior. Do I think he can be a good coach? Sure, and I hope that he is. I think he has a good shot at it too, I do like the way things our going but lets not pretend we got the best out there (at least not on paper). I am now taking the wait and see appoarch. I will be happy when we win and I will not give any credit until that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I agree Tom. Lerner has done as good a job as one could expect. You are always going to have people who wanted this guy or that guy, but we went about this in a diligent way. We hired who we wanted....and we isn't some fans on a message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I agree as well..we dont know if mangini/kokinis can take us to the promised land in 2 years but one thing i am fairly sure of is that they will be a stablizing force that will build and mentor the browns in that direction....the fact that randy has been embarrassed by the browns performance this season and has acted with authority to start anew with an experienced coach and a gm that is truly and legitimately ready to step up to gm in kokinis is enough to convince me that randy isnt going to follow in his fathers footsteps and keep letting this team sink further...2 thumbs up to randy lerner under the circumstances he has stepped up to the plate and hit a homerun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plumcrazy73 Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I will hold judgment till i see what ends up on the field. so far looks good, however it looked good the last time too, but this one feels better overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I will hold judgment till i see what ends up on the field. so far looks good, however it looked good the last time too, but this one feels better overall. There is never any way to predict how things will finally turn out, but yep...I feel better too. The last time it seemed all the hype was about the GM and I just never could see that. In the end, it is about the coach and players, not the GM and players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownB499 Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 The problem I have with this process is that Slo Lerner interviewed only one coach that fit the criteria he claimed to be looking for, then hired him and handed him the keys to the franchise. Where is Kokinis? Here we are two weeks later still waiting for a GM to be hired and obviously he'll be strictly a paper guy,so far all decisions have been up to Mangini. If I'm an NFL executive of any substance I'm not interested in being this guys lap dog I mean he's got three years experience,and Slo Lerner's giving him full control? Didn't we do the same thing with Butch Davis? The fact is all our eggs are in one basket now and that's not what any of us had in mind when the season ended I hope he truly is a Man Genius,otherwise we're in for four more years of same old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicopee John Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I agree Tom. Lerner has done as good a job as one could expect. You are always going to have people who wanted this guy or that guy, but we went about this in a diligent way. We hired who we wanted....and we isn't some fans on a message board. The quibbling will stop when the Ws outnumber the Ls. To date, Lerner Sr. and Lerner Jr. have done a horrible job. Hoping that things, somehow, change................... In less than 10 years: how many coaches, Presidents, GMs, etc. A lousy track record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We need Tom Tupa Posted January 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I started that thread and I think it holds some merit. Are you telling me that on paper, Pioli and Shanahan are not better then Mangini and Kioknis (sp?)? At the time I made the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal. At the time, it had some merit. Now we know that ESPN was wrong, and our speculation was off-base. Just like when I thought Schott and Weiss were going to be available or when people thought Lerner hadnt considered Spags and the Philly GM. If Pioli/Shanahan was an option, then I would understand criticizing Lerner for not giving it a look. But it doesnt look like it was an option for anyone, let alone us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I also feel very good about the Brown's "new direction". Now, as a fan, it is my turn to support them. Time will tell, but I do not have the major concerns I had with past hirings. I really think it's been done right this time. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I started that thread and I think it holds some merit. Are you telling me that on paper, Pioli and Shanahan are not better then Mangini and Kioknis (sp?)? At the time I made the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal. We have had 10 years of failure with this organization, sorry Im not ready to jump up and down and say that Mangini is our savior. Do I think he can be a good coach? Sure, and I hope that he is. I think he has a good shot at it too, I do like the way things our going but lets not pretend we got the best out there (at least not on paper). I am now taking the wait and see appoarch. I will be happy when we win and I will not give any credit until that is the case. Last I checked, KC didn't hire Shanahan yet. So we are busting Lerner's balls for not getting a guy no one has gotten yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlaygroundLegend Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I really have liked his descisions so far (Except for not hiring Mcdaniels) Mangini is growing on me though. It looks like we're really cleaning house, and our organization has a real positive vibe coming from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eqrulz101 Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Last I checked, KC didn't hire Shanahan yet. So we are busting Lerner's balls for not getting a guy no one has gotten yet? I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME. Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal. Do I like the hiring of Mangini? Ya, I think he can work out and I wasnt disappointed when he was hired. He has the critera I wanted. EXPERENICE. But I also want what is the best out there. Am I wrong for that? Na, I dont think so. Nor am I busting Lerner's balls. I havent once called for him to sell the team as I know others have. But I'm not ready to say all of a sudden he knows what he is doing, maybe he has learned a thing or two, or hired someone that knows a thing or two about football but as I said, I'll take a wait and see approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We need Tom Tupa Posted January 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME. Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal. The whole point of the thread is that several of us, at different times, have criticized Lerner based on bad information. As new information came out in each situation, Lerner looked better and our criticism looked misplaced. Your post on Shanahan is a perfect example of this. Do you disagree? As for Pioli/Shanahan v. Mankok, I absolutely CAN dispute your claim that the former is better. First of all, we have almost no idea how much of Pioli's success is his and how much is Belichek's. Second, Pioli's drafts have been very inconsistent - there's another thread discussing it elsewhere. Suffice to say, he misses as frequently as anyone else. Take away his 7th round QBs and he has a mediocre record. As for Shanahan, the guy's defense is horrid. Always. And he was fired because he refused to give up the reigns of the defense. You cant have an AFC North team with a shitty defense. It doesnt work. And is record is not as untouchable as it has been treated. He misses the playoffs more often than not, and loses in the first round the majority of the time that he makes the playoffs. I'm not saying he's a bad coach, but it isnt clear that he wouldve been a better fit than Mangini. Oh yeah, and Lerner did contact Shanahan AND interview Pioli before hiring Mankok, so it wasnt a lack of consideration or insight. It was a purposeful and informed decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geech Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 We are quick to bash (Slow Lerner) ...and rightfully so. I like the Mangini hiring, but I still have a wait and see attitude. Like Chicopee John said, "The quibbling will stop when the Ws outnumber the Ls." I'm not ready to start shouting, "In Lerner I trust!" -Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OconRecon Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Here's what I like. The Browns have plenty of company in the we-fired-our coach boat. From everything I can tell, Lerner has been the most aggressive and has the most to show for his work. He's interviewed and considered multiple candidates for each position. Because this due diligence was very active, he still has the Browns ahead in the race compared to other teams in our situation. None of the new HC's have the chance to get wins this time of year, so all even on that point as sure, wins in the end is all that matters. I still say Quinn's success or failure will make Mangini, Kokinis, and Lerner either look like heros or goats. If Quinn fails, we'll all question if we should have gone after any of these candidates if they have more wins. If it all works out, here's how it'll go: The O-line plays well (no more allowing LB's straight up the gut at our QB), then Quinn will have the time to make good decisions and drive the ball, then The Browns will win, then Mangini will look like the correct choice, then We'll all say Lerner did a bang up job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 ...As for Pioli/Shanahan v. Mankok, I ab... Awesome, awesome nickname, Toop. Ok, so I'm twelve years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Masters Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME. Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal. Do I like the hiring of Mangini? Ya, I think he can work out and I wasnt disappointed when he was hired. He has the critera I wanted. EXPERENICE. But I also want what is the best out there. Am I wrong for that? Na, I dont think so. Nor am I busting Lerner's balls. I havent once called for him to sell the team as I know others have. But I'm not ready to say all of a sudden he knows what he is doing, maybe he has learned a thing or two, or hired someone that knows a thing or two about football but as I said, I'll take a wait and see approach. Sure I can. It isn't fact. It's opinion. It requires leaping to the assumption that Pioli wasn't BB's lacking and that the two guys can work well together. I like the hiring of Mangini. At the time of his hiring, he was the most experienced HCing canidate and he wasn't a bad HC with the Jets, and they were foolish to fire him. Of course you are busting his balls. You complaining about who he didn't get and leaping to the assumption that those he didn't get will end up better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eqrulz101 Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Sure I can. It isn't fact. It's opinion. It requires leaping to the assumption that Pioli wasn't BB's lacking and that the two guys can work well together. I like the hiring of Mangini. At the time of his hiring, he was the most experienced HCing canidate and he wasn't a bad HC with the Jets, and they were foolish to fire him. Of course you are busting his balls. You complaining about who he didn't get and leaping to the assumption that those he didn't get will end up better. I disagree, and I guess it is opinion but its based on the fact that Shanahan is a superbowl winning coach and Mangini up to this point is a sub .500 head coach. On paper Shanahan is better, to me you cant dispute that but everybody views things differently I guess. Pioli was the hottest prospect GM and before we knew we wasnt going to get him everybody on this board wanted him and thought he was the best out there. Now that we decided not to hire him, Kokinis a guy nobody was talking about is suppose to be better? Why, because that is who we ended up with? On paper to me, Pioli was the guy everybody wanted. We are talking on paper here because thats all we have to base anything on. Now in a few years, Mangini and Kokinis may end up better, for the browns sake lets hope so, but at this point I dont believe you can say they are better. I am questioning Lerner yes, but I think past history has to make you question him, but I'm not calling for the guy to sell the team. I just want him to put a winner together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roach Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. i dispute it. It's not a fact. You can't say "on paper" and then proclaim that it is a fact. That makes no sense. Your basis is a theory. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eqrulz101 Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 i dispute it. It's not a fact. You can't say "on paper" and then proclaim that it is a fact. That makes no sense. Your basis is a theory. Nothing more. Read one post up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roach Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 I still say Quinn's success or failure will make Mangini, Kokinis, and Lerner either look like heros or goats. If Quinn fails, we'll all question if we should have gone after any of these candidates if they have more wins. Wow. i don't give a shit whether Quinn succeeds or even plays another down. It is important to me that Mangini succeed. i'm beginning to see Lum's viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OconRecon Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 I think you're missing my point. It has nothing to do with Quinn per say, but has everything to do with the QB. If the QB plays well, then the HC looks good, and the front office will look good too. I don't care how talented the GM or HC is, if the QB isn't out there turning the ball over, then that's that. Example: Carmen Policy at the 49'ers with Joe Montana and he was brilliant. Executive of the year, etc., etc. Carmen Policy at the Browns with a handful of lousy QB's and he had no success. I realize the QB can't do it alone, which is why I pointed to O-line play. I also don't care who QB's the Browns, as long as they win, or are at least competitive. Since DA was the worst ranked starting offensive player for the Browns last year, he's done. So really? You're starting to see Lum's point of view? The QB needs to play well or everyone else looks bad. If DA wouldn't have thrown 5 pics against the Bengals in '07 or played at least half as well in most games as he did against the Giants on MNF in '08, Quinn would still be on the pine, which would have been fine. (I will admit I never thought DA had the stuff. I still don't.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roach Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 i'm more confused. So if Mangini wins, but doesn't have a successful QB by NFL (or this Board's) standards, then he is a failure? Please explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budcarson Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Ill take him over Ralph Wilson or Al Davis any day. He may, in the end, prove himself inept, but at least he's been trying and is fairly free of meddling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roach Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Ill take him over Ralph Wilson or Al Davis any day. He may, in the end, prove himself inept, but at least he's been trying and is fairly free of meddling. This thread is becomming more bizarre. You're painting Al Davis and Ralph Wilson with the same brush? Where did that come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OconRecon Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 i'm more confused. So if Mangini wins, but doesn't have a successful QB by NFL (or this Board's) standards, then he is a failure? Please explain. Oh, I get where we're not connecting. I think the QB play determines the success of a team more than any other factor. I guess you can have a winner with poor QB play, but it is less likely. If Quinn is below average or flops and is replaced, but the Browns are winning, I'll take it for sure. I just don't think its likely for Quinn to fail AND the Browns to succeed in '09. They'll at least give Quinn 8 games I'd imagine, and if he fails, then '09 will be a repeat of '08 I fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roach Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 If Quinn is below average or flops and is replaced, but the Browns are winning, I'll take it for sure. I just don't think its likely for Quinn to fail AND the Browns to succeed in '09. They'll at least give Quinn 8 games I'd imagine, and if he fails, then '09 will be a repeat of '08 I fear. Now i'm with ya. If we go into the season with DA at the helm out of necessity, i don't think most on this Board are as mature as you are about that. You are a true Browns fan. Are you coming to a tailgate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OconRecon Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 Are you coming to a tailgate? Going to have to at one point. This is the best Browns board going by a mile. Need to meet some face to face. (Re-reading my initial post, I wasn't very clear. All good now) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 I have to throw this out there regarding Shanahan & Pioli & the FACTS as stated....here are a couple FACTS: 1) Pioli is UNPROVEN at the GM level. 2) In the last THREE years (which is what Mangini is judged on), Shanahan has a "500" record, 24W & 24L, with NO playoff appearances, & he had HOW many years, post Elway, to rebuild his program? The above 2 items ARE facts, & recent history doesn't tell me that that pairing would have been our best bet. Given almost even records & 1 playoff appearance by Mangini, I would go with the younger guy every time. I preferred Mangini over Shanahan from the start, but that's just my preference. We'll see what happens down the road, but Shanahan would certainly NOT have been a guaranteed step up. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.