First of all … no Bailey's at the party.
Harrumph.
Second … John asked a few questions in an earlier comment. And since he's reading and writing from Japan and since I'm appreciative he's doing that, I'd like to address his comments.
If I may paraphrase, he asked why the hiring of Mike Holmgren was any different than the hiring of Eric Mangini. He said that Lerner repeated this trend: "Fall in love with a name and look at no one else."
Why, John asks, did Lerner not bring in five or 10 people to interview, then decide?
Fair questions.
But I truly think the situations with Holmgren and Mangini are vastly different.
And I'd like to do this without being negative toward Mangini. I think I've gone on record about what's happened this season, so there's not a lot more to be said. Plus, if the George Kokinis/fired GM grievance ever gets truly public, it'll be negative enough — for everyone.
I just think Holmgren makes sense.
In saying that, I know I'm basing it on faith and judgment, because Holmgren has never run a team the way he will run the Browns.
But I feel I'm on terra firma here.
I'm basing my feelings on what I know about Holmgren, how he's carried himself when he's worked, what people whose judgment I trust say and tell me about him, the success he's had and how he's come across in the (admittedly few) dealings I've had with him. Lerner has a lot more information than I have; I think he got this right. Not to say that there might not be other candidates, just that the one he chose is qualified and credible.
Holmgren's resume commands attention. So does his leadership. So does his work ethic.
He's a high-character guy, a strong family guy. Those values are important. They matter when you're trying to get a group of people to follow your lead. The right values and principles are a strong starting point.
The next step is putting those values and principles into action, and Holmgren has shown he knows what it takes to win.
He's taken two teams to Super Bowls.
He knows how to find and work with quarterbacks.
He understands the importance of bringing players along.
He's the kind of guy who learns from others.
He' honest — a very important trait in my mind. He'll address questions. He won't hide behind the drivel so many in the NFL hide behind these days. Fans will appreciate his candor — even more so if he wins.
He simply brings a lot of positives to the table.
Almost everyone I speak to speaks highly of Holmgren.
How will we feel if, for instance, Holmgren can convince Jon Gruden that the Browns are the right place for him? A team of Holmgren-GM-Gruden really doesn't sound so bad does it? (No, I have no inside information on Gruden … I'm just throwing out a name.)
Folks in Seattle were apoplectic when the Seahawks announced he wasn't joining the front office there.
Would we rather Holmgren and a new GM he chooses or Mangini and a GM of his choosing be the guiding forces behind the 11 draft picks the Browns have in April?
Randy Lerner did a ton of research before interviewing Holmgren. He had a lot of advice, from those in Berea and from those around the NFL.
The search never stopped. The only reason it might have slowed was Holmgren took some time to go to Mexico with his wife to work with the poor there. Hard to interview while you're helping the poor in Oaxaca.
I know Holmgren has never done the job he's agreed to do. But (to paraphrase Mangini) you make a judgment based on the best information, and go from there. The best information about Holmgren is pretty much consistently positive.
Too, a lot of successful head coaches were assistants when they were hired as head coach. At some point, someone had to reward their work by promoting them. It happens in every business. Guys are promoted to positions they've never held based on their body of work, their approach and their acumen for the business.
The Browns have a football guy running football, a football guy who will make the football decisions and, more important, sit back and ask the question "why?" when he sees something odd happening. I wish this kind of hire had taken place in January; it didn't. Lerner addressed it now.
Holmgren was in demand. Had the Browns not hired him another team would have. There was no way he was not going to be in the NFL in 2010.
The "czar" word was not one started by the Browns. It came from outside, from people like me. Lerner wanted to follow a model like the one in Miami, where Bill Parcells took over, hired a GM and then hired a coach.
Holmgren will hire a GM and a coach — maybe keep Mangini.
Lerner could and would have waited until after the season to make a move, but he didn't need to. He had a good guy, a smart guy, a football guy, interested. He called him, brought him in, talked to him, let him think and then the two sides agreed it was best he join the Browns.
There was no reason to wait because he had a guy he believed in, and more important a guy with a track record who is smart enough to know what he doesn't know and wise enough to hire smart people.
Yes, someone else might become available after the season who's as good. But it's hard for me to think the Browns would find someone appreciably better.
In this instance, I have to credit Lerner.
Because he didn't allow pride to stand in his way. He didn't allow a mistake to continue just to prove he was right.
He assessed the situation, saw it wasn't working and acted by finding a highly qualified and reputable guy who seems prepared to make the move to the front office role he's been hired to fill.
In three years, I could be writing how wrong I was to say these things.
But I really don't think that will happen.
I believe this hire will prove to be a wise one.
I gotta say, despite all my reservations (and this season has been a ride on a Geauga Lake roller-coaser, if they still exist), I'm starting to buy into Mangini's theories… that this move looks like a winner. Holmgren runs the personnel; Mangini coaches the team; we keep Cribbs, Harrison, Rogers, and the Jets has-beens that have proved their mettle, and finally figure out what we're going to do at QB (still a season out, IMHO). Going forward: 1): PAY CRIBBS. 2) If I'm a fan of any other team in the AFC North: BE AFRAID. BE VERY, VERY AFRAID.
With this hire, Lerner shows his passion to make the Browns a winner and spend whatever is necessary to make it happen. Good thing he laid off those loyal employees last winter to save a couple thousand dollars so he could afford to pay Holmgren $50 mil, huh Pat?
He was a good soldier when Goodell told the owners to make it appear like they under severe financial hardship, but it looks pretty foolish right now.
First, John if you had to ask that question, you've been in Japan to long….hiring Mike Holmgren is not just another name. MH has won 2 superbowls and been in the league as a coach or an assitant for over 20 years.
Pat, nice to read your article without any negativity..it suits you. I'm with you on MH. I think it's a very solid hire and I also salute RL for having the nads to step forward and correct an error in judgement from before.
After watching this circus for the last 40 years I think a lot of this is just flat timing. Remember last year when RL hired EM, there was noone else really available that was remarkably better than the next. The chin and the walrus were going to sit out a year….really wasn't much to choose from except possibly Floyd Reese who would have been a solid hire also. If I had to choose between the two, I would go with MH because of his solid coaching background.
Now the trick is going to be getting the right GM. I will say that this morning the air was crisp and it smelled refreshing. Refreshing to be out from under the Bill Parcells tree of coaching and smugness. Merry Christmas to all!
WOW! A smart guy whos coached,whos been GM/Coach, back to Coach,now EL Presidente of Football OPS….and whos previous FAN base already misses him as their blasting the front office and new coach( see Seattle Times)! Looks Like WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well stated Pat. Thanks for posting. Bummer about the Bailey's.
As long as Holmgren is truly free to make the call on the coach, then I'm fine with whatever Holmgren decides. Holmgren needs to understand what really happened between Mangini and Kokinis. If (and we don't know yet what really happened) Mangini misled his friend about "total control" as Kokinis is saying, then Holmgren would be foolish to think he isn't capable of undermining Holmgren's authority as well.
To PM's speculation on Gruden – - I think Gruden is destined to join his brother-from-another-mother, Bruce Allen in DC. One of Allen's buddies was talking on DC sports radio about this, and he says it's a certainty. (Speaking just from knowing Allen and Gruden personally over the years — not because Allen confided to him that he planned on hiring Gruden to follow Zorn.) It might happen after Gruden finishes is MNF contract, but if Gruden gets out of his broadcast contract to coach next year, it will be with Allen and the Redskins. (Though PM is right – - Gruden with the Browns/Holmgren does have some appeal.)
The Browns must have interviewed other candidates besides Holmgren, right? The Rooney rule requires it. So I suspect that question will be answered during the Browns press conference next week.
To D. Parker's comments above, I couldn't agree more: the season has been like a roller coaster ride from Geauga Lake – - provided you count the first half of the season as the super long wait in line before the ride even starts.
After a pre- and regular season that seemed hopeless until Week 12 or 13, we now have reason to be optimistic that Browns are in good hands. The past few weeks have been entertaining, but when you look at the entire pre- and regular season – - this has been as agonizing a year as any that I can remember.
Here's to hoping it gets better. Here's to hoping everyone reading is having a great holiday season. Go Browns!
Great post Pat.
I posted this before: who cares who they hire? just win, dang it.
Maybe it's best not to criticize someone else's perceived lack of knowledge. Holmgren has 1 Super Bowl win as a head coach, the Seahawks lost to the Steelers.
And sorry, but I don't understand the growing fetish regarding Gruden. No one here(I live about 20 miles E of Tampa) had anything negative to say about his departure until Morris turned out to be a major disappointment. There were calls for his firing from all quarters long before the Glazers bothered to listen. Gruden has a league wide reputation for disliking young players, specifically QB's. What are the Browns? A young, rebuilding team with 3 young QB's.
But let's just look at his record with the Bucs. In 7 seasons, 57-55. Most people here put an * beside the super bowl season, fair or not, it was Dungy's team that won it. Remove the 12-4 record from his resume and what's left? 45-51 with 1st round playoff losses the 2 times they made them, and the 2007 appearance they stumbled into the playoffs at 9-7. The Browns were 10-6 that year. I guess no one remembers that the season before that the Browns and Bucs were both 4-12 and flipped a coin to set the draft order.
I guess people don't remember A LOT about Gruden's success as a head coach.
To make the change in this functional family, it had to start at the top. A wonderful move to restart a class organization. Woof woof!!!!!!!
To make the change in this dysfunctional family, it had to start at the top. A wonderful move to restart a class organization. Woof woof!!!!!!!
Hey Bob2…
You mention Gruden's Super Bowl…Dungy couldn't get it done in Tampa failed to every year. Gruden comes in takes his team to the Super Bowl to play what? His former team. Gruden is the only coach in NFL history to have two teams in the super bowl at the same time. If not for the "tuck" rule, it's likely Gruden would have stayed in Oakland and the Raiders, not the Pats, would be the 2000's dynasty team.
Before Holmgren agreed to take the job. When Holmgren was just an idea. The idea of keeping Mangini as coach seemed as if it could be a possible one. I have changed my mind about that.
As President of the team, Holmgren brings a different set of experiences than the whole Parcells tree thing. If Mangini stays, something has to give. I can't see Mangini changing his defensive mindset to suit Holmgren and Holmgren is THE boss so changing HIS mindset is moot.
So Holmgren walks down on the field during training camp and hears language that is foreign to him? It ain't gonna happen! Mangini is gone. Ryan and Daboll are gone. The next question is Can Quinn run a west coast offense? I sure hope so because I would hate to waste another top draft pick on a quarterback. I am pretty sure DA can't because of his lack of touch.
As far as blowing it up…no matter if we finish 5 and 11…this team is blown up already. Our biggest playmaker is Josh Cribbs. Our #1 wide receiver? We don't have a #1. Our #1 running back? Ummmm? Tight end??? The right side of the O line is in need of major repair. And on defense? Pick a position and we probably need it.
Mangini did himself no favors with his mistakes but the difference between Parcells and Holmgren is like the difference between the United States and Russia during the cold war. They both get the job done but they get it done in very different ways.
Oh, and Pat, sorry I didn't put this in my earlier post:
"I didn't get a Harrumph out of that guy!"
My sentiments exactly Pat, as I stated in a previous article ,everyone assumes Cowher, Gruden ,or even Marty ,want to coach. If he offered Cower a GM role who knows ? The guy is good at evaluating talent as well, and may not want to freeze his behind off anymore on some field. That fluffy warm job he has now analyzing may have softened him up a little.
You build stable winners from the top down ,the Mangini thing will take care of itself.
Bud Shaw in the Plain Dealer had a comment on Mangini-Holmgren that gave me a different perspective — in the decision on keeping or not keeping Mangini, more can be learned by Holmgren in evaluating Mangini on his role in the Kokinis firing than on the various ups and downs of his coaching style (because Holmgren's job is to build an organization of like-minded people, whose like-mind is Holmgren-like).
And I can't see Mangini twisting Holmgren around his little finger … and that means the draft is safe from Mangini and the team may not pick up another dozen discarded ex-Jets ….
quinn is on i.r. for the rest of the year.
if mangini can squeeze wins out of the rest of the games with dipstick anderson at the helm he will have impressed me for the first time in his doughboy career. somehow, i just don't see it happening.
That "Harrison broke Jim Brown's franchise record for rushing in a game" stuff is driving me crazy. Uh, no he didn't. Maybe William Green's record, or whoever, but not Jim Brown's.
Harrison's one game reminds me of Tony Delk. People should really lay off the pipe.
Really? Quinn was put on injured reserve? I didn't even know he was hurt. Did he slip and fall in the bubble bath during a Men's Health magazine photo shoot, or what.
I view Quinn being placed on IR as an opportunity to either improve our draft position or increase DA's offseason trade value….
Agree with the article. Not sure if Holmgren is the right guy or not. Time will tell if he can rebuild the Browns. Can he judge talent? That is the question. One thing I think is sure…Mangini is not very good at it. He took a 4-12 team and rebuilt it into one that is struggling to get there. His draft picks, except for Mack, have not impressed. He passed over other picks that have…Clay Matthews for example. Overall, he took a pretty bad team and made it awful. Not the right direction.
Pat,
It appears that only yourself and the Beacon Journal have failed to realize that nobody really cares what your thoughts are any longer
These last two games are an audition for D. Anderson.
I hope that we don't have to suffer through another QB competition.
I wonder of twinkle-toes Lewis will un-retire?
Will LB Roth and RB Harrison and all of the other soon to be FAs stay with the club now that Holmgren will at the helm?
Will the other Somoan LB ever get chance to play?
Is H. Poteat actually better than Cory Francies?
Will Lerner use his money to bring in players if the new CBA fails to get ratified by the powers in charge and the other clubs begin to dump their high-priced players?
Parker, Keep Mangini??? What are you talking about? 172 passing yards in the three wins this year. We score two touchdowns on 100 and 102 yard returns last week, otherwise we lose!! All of a sudden you are a Mangini supporter? The defense is putrid and the offense speaks for itself. We played KC!!! He traded the #5 pick for a bunch of backups.
The only reason Mangini would stay is if Holmgren knows he can get Gruden NEXT year. Otherwise he will move on.
g-mann17
You seem to be a Gruden fan, that's your personal choice. Compare Gruden's success after his first season in Tampa with Dungy's in Indy. They don't compare. After the inevitable team breakup that follows a championship Gruden got the chance to draft players, and sign FA's, that he liked. The result was a 6 year losing record, and no playoff wins since. This year's 2-12 record gives you an idea of the talent level he amassed in those years. Gaines Adams for example, is on his last chance to avoid the label of "epic bust". He never approached the level of Gerard Warren, or even Courtney Brown. He was supposedly Gruden's "signature pick". Nice choice.
As for "Gruden is the only coach in NFL history to have two teams in the super bowl at the same time.", nonsense. If Oakland that year was Gruden's team, then why wasn't TB Dungy's? You can't have it both ways.
Gruden's teams won a pretty tough division a couple times and they did it on a shoestring budget, creating more salary cap space than any team in the league. I've never heard Adams referred to as Gruden's "signature pick," and think it's likely Monte Kiffen had more input if the pick came from the coaching staff. When Gruden picked offensive players in the first round they were either rookie of the year types (Cadillac/Clayton) or future pro bowlers (Joseph). His biggest problem was they never landed a decent qb.
As far as on-the-field coaching, the 2-12 team was 9-7 under Gruden's guidance last year.
"I've never heard Adams referred to as Gruden's "signature pick," You're fortunate not to be stuck with the media homers here. Adams was single-handedly going to found a new, improved Steel Curtain. You can claim Williams/Clayton as impact players, I guess. For 1 season each. Williams had a bit over 1200 yds as a rookie, since then injuries have made him invisible. Projecting his total stats for this season, after 5 full saesons he'll have less than 3100 yds, with 17 TD's and 9 fumbles. 600 yards and 3 TD's a year is a bust.
Clayton? 80 catches for almost 1200 yards as a rokkie, with 7 TD's. Since? 32-372-0, 33-356-1, 25-340-0, 38-484-1, 2009 projected 16-233-1. Career 219-2910-10.
The luster's off.
Sorry Larry, 1 other thing. The tear after their SB win, they went 7-9 and missed the playoffs. Followed by 5-11. And a pretty tough division? The NFC South? Until NO this year, there's not what you'd call a tradition of excellence there. TB, NO, Atlanta and Carolina? The 4 combined have 3 total SB appearances and are 1-2 overall.
New Orleans, Atlanta and Carolina have all fielded pretty decent teams the last seven years, Bob. Not every year, but they are all teams that for the most part have been contenders for playoff berths over that time period and there aren't that many divisions that don't have at least one dog of a team you can count on blowing chunks every year. To me that makes it a fairly tough division, and it is evidenced in the fact that no team has been able to win the division consistently. The Bucs under Gruden won it as consistently as any of the other clubs.
Cadillac and Clayton were not bad draft picks, as their rookie numbers attest to. They haven't followed up–Cadillac because of injuries, Clayton because he doesn't work hard or is a head case–but I thought we were discussing Gruden's evaluation of talent and it is undeniable both those players had the talent to succeed in the NFL.
In any case, I still see no evidence that the Adams pick was tabbed Gruden's "signature pick." He was taken very high, but I don't recall any comparisons to the Steel Curtain, either. That's preposterous.