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.

Holmgren said …

–He’d decide “sooner rather than later.”

–Randy Lerner deserves that consideration, and he added Lerner was “more than fair to me” and is an “honest man.” He added: “I’m not trying to leverage anybody. (It’s) about as good situation (as) you can ask for in this business.” He even said that the best thing about the Cleveland situation is “ownership.” This is a clear reflection of the way people feel about Lerner in the NFL. As I’ve said before, when he sits and meets with folks and discusses things, people listen and they like him.

–“… the challenge of rebuilding is in my blood.”

–“It's a wonderful job with lot of responsibly and not a lot of layers between me and Randy. There are none. I'm dealing with the owner. Very appealing from that aspect.” Though Holmgren did not come out and say directly that he would not coach, this statement indicates to me that he’s considering only being the team’s football leader and not its coach. Two things on this: If Holmgren wants to coach, there’s no reason to interview now. He could wait until after the season and see what’s available in a place like Dallas. Second, Lerner has a coach. And he is not the kind of guy who is going to seek a new coach while he has one. To me, every bit of context in the Holmgren interview indicates that he’s not considering coaching but he is strongly considering taking over the Browns football operations.

His complete statement on Eric Mangini:

“It would be unfair to talk too much about that. I like Eric Mangini, good coach, bright guy, works hard at his job and we have to see. Anytime you go in and are (responsible) for who that person is, in fairness to everybody, you better give everyone a chance. This is his first year in Cleveland, I supposed there have been situations … Bill Parcells in Miami made a coaching change. Having been a coach for so many years, I'd be the first one to tell you that's not fair. Tough decisions aren't fair. I'd do everything in my power (to make sure) it is the right one.”

–His family is on the West Coast, which is a consideration in a move to Cleveland. Holmgren is a strong family man, and leaving his children and grandchildren might be one of his bigger hurdles.

There was nothing in the interview that would dissuade me from a guy like Holmgren. Yes, he has some hurdles to clear, but I think he’d admit it that himself. All the things Holmgren said are the reasons he’d be an attractive hire to me – intelligence, thoughtful, honest, hard-working, credible.

We’ll see what happens.

2)      Not that Holmgren's work in Seattle was perfect. But he knows football, having been around it his entire life. He coached 17 years, went to the playoffs 12 times. He went to three Super Bowls, and took Seattle to the playoffs six times. Geez … where do you sign up? Every quarterback he's worked with has improved. And… he's worked with winners, including a  real winner in Ron Wolf. Best as I can tell, Holmgren gets it. From what I've seen, Holmgren is not in it to satisfy his ego, obtain power or gain personal reward. He's in it to win.

3)      Holmgren would have to prove he can judge, scout and choose talent, because there were issues in Seattle. But there are two factors that seem to lean to the positive end of things if he takes over. Holmgren would be doing one job, not two. And, if the Miami Dolphins model is followed, he would be hiring a GM as well. Which means there would be another layer of responsibility in the building, which means more people contributing to what we hope would be smart decisions. Holmgren's role, should he choose to accept it, would be to guide the ship.

4)      Holmgren would also decide on the future of Eric Mangini. There would be input from owner Randy Lerner, but Lerner would not overrule a guy he brings in to run his football operations. For one, Lerner does not interfere. He goes out of his way not to interfere. For two, what sense would it make for an owner to spend a ton of money on a leader of football and then not let the leader of football be the leader of football.

5)      It well could be that Holmgren would want to give Mangini another year. He has gone on record saying a coach deserves more than one year. But he also said this on Seattle radio station KJR: "As a management person, you might have to make . . . a very difficult decision that way, if in your opinion you think it's absolutely going in the wrong direction.  But those situations are really few and far between." Interpret it as you will.

6)      This should put to rest all the rumblings that were emanating (like that word? … emanating … e-m-a- … never mind) from Berea that because the Browns beat Pittsburgh Mangini's job was safe for another year. That win over the Steelers was the best win a 1-and-11 team could have. It made the Browns 2-and-11.

7)      That win — and yes, it was a good win — does not change the reality that this season has been a mess of poor communication, of a forced bus trip for rookies and long practices for angry veterans, of poor second-halves and quirky on-field decisions like the timeouts against Detroit and Cincinnati. There has been clock mismanagement, message mismanagement and player mismanagement (see Quinn, Brady). There have been injuries during opportunity periods, hidden starting quarterbacks and rookies inactive for extended and mysterious periods of time. There has been improvement and growth lately, and the Pittsburgh game was a good one. But overall it's been a mess, and it doesn't make sense to hang your hats on two wins in terrible and equalizing weather against Buffalo and Pittsburgh when the Browns quarterbacks completed two and six passes.

8)      Some would say that a coach deserves more than one season to prove himself, and that's a valid point of view. I disagree in this case, but I respect the point of view. Too, Lerner may want to give the coach he hired last January another year to sort things out, or to see if he can sort things out. Mangini has worked extremely hard, and he cares. And some of the principles he's enacted are the right ones. He may string some wins together here at the end of the year. But let the new leader of football make the decision.

9)      For those who say changing the coach is starting over one more time and that’s no good, I'd have to say this: I agree. But I also ask: Where does a team go when it's 2-11? It has to start from the bottom whether it's a new coach, old coach or Foghorn Leghorn as coach. All we've heard to this point is about the process and the shared vision and all that claptrap garbage we've heard for 11 years. And all we're going to hear is the late-season effort means so much. I'd love to be wrong about this, you know. Maybe Mangini stays and wins eight games next season and I have to eat the bottom of my old Chuck Taylors. Could happen, though I don't see it. But if Holmgren is making the call I believe the Browns will be well served.

10)      People always ask about Lerner and what he's like. I say I like him, he's a good guy, I don't always agree with him but I respect him. Ask around the league and you'll learn that he's a very liked guy. I know of one guy last year who decried not coming to Cleveland precisely because he respected Lerner so much. The relevance? This could help the Browns in this cause. Because when they talk to him, people like the owner and want to work for him.

And, because it's the Browns … a bonus 11 …

11)       It sure seems like Josh Cribbs has earned that new contract.

Three and Out

Dear Pat,

I decided to chime in on whether Eric Mangini deserves another year – it is my humble opinion that any coach who beats the Steelers in his first year deserves Year 2.  Complain about the practices, complain about the Berea murals, complain about the mishandling of Kokinis, and complain about the player moves all you want, but just remember – Cleveland beat Pittsburgh.  It’s like OSU beating Michigan.  We should be dancing in the streets!

Mangini has a .500 record against Pittsburgh.  Rome Crennel can’t say that.  Terry Robiskie can’t say that.  Butch Davis can’t say that.  Chris Palmer can’t say that.  Eric Mangini can.  Enough said.  Give Mangini and the crew another year. 

 James P. Hogan

Indianapolis, Ind.

Dear James,

I like you, I appreciate your constantly writing and reading …

But it's beyond me how anyone who watches Peyton Manning and the Colts year after year can justify one more year based on one stinking game that wasn't even that well played.

Have you forgot …

Minnesota 34, Cleveland 20

Denver 27, Cleveland 6

Baltimore 34, Cleveland 3

Pittsburgh 27, Cleveland 14

Green Bay 31, Cleveland 3

Chicago 30, Cleveland 6 (Chicago!)

Detroit 38, Cleveland 37 (Detroit!)

Baltimore 16, Cleveland 0

But that's what great about America.

We have the right to be wrong. Me included.

By the way … Chris Palmer can say he was .500 against Pittsburgh. Beat them in Pittsburgh in 1999 and beat them in Cleveland in 2000.

Pat

Dear Pat,

It seems that the last month the Browns have been playing better due to effort alone!  My question is why?  My friends and my uninformed theory (developed in conjunction with Miller Lite) is that Eric Mangini has eased up and started treating them as men and not kindergarteners.

Your thoughts?

Saurabh Gupta

Dear Saurabh,

My first thought is that Labatt Blue is made from all natural ingredients and tastes much better. In my house we have two kinds of beer: Labatt Blue, and Labatt Blue (and only because true Guinness is not available).

My second thought is I don't know the reason for the change, other than guys trying and Pittsburgh playing bad football and San Diego cashing it in the fourth quarter.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: NFL players rarely cash it in. They almost always play hard, for themselves and for each other.

The one thing I'll never understand is how the defense has improved the more players have gotten hurt. Odd.

Dear Pat,

How is it that the bars in Ireland have a tap system that allows Guinness to pour correctly, but in the States I have been to exactly ONE bar, ever (downtown in Manhattan), that could manage this feat properly?  Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.  Might it be the hard-wired patience of the native Irish Bartender?  Is this a skill one can ever hope to replicate?  In one's lifetime? 

Bob Kusyk

Charlottesville, Va. (a great home, but without a bar that pours a proper Guinness)

Dear Bob,

Yes, you wrote a lengthy letter, touching on many Browns topics. But to be honest, none seemed as pertinent or important as the first question you raised.

I have actually found a bar in Cleveland, called Stone Mad I believe, on West 65th north of Detroit. It pours as fine a Guinness as you'll find.

Not like in Ireland, mind you. But tasty.

(Want to be recognized in “Three and Out”? It’s a rare treat. Comment here or send an e-mail to pmcmanamon@thebeaconjournal.com, and put “First and 10” in the subject line.)

Which doesn't add up.

It actually seems that tonight's game might be no more relevant to his future than the game against Green Bay or the stirring win over Buffalo.

Because judging anyone on one game is simply silly. A coach produces a body of work, and Mangini has providd plenty on which to judge this this year. Judging him on one game implies that the other stuff does not matter.

One game — win or lose — does not erase a season's worth of work that has the Browns at 1-11 and ranked near the bottom of every statistical category offensively and defensively.

A 2-11 record is somehow going to make everything that has happened more palatable?

Please.

Mangini's future will be decided after the season, and all signs point to team owner Randy Lerner wanting the new person he hires to make the determination on the coach's future.

If that's true then it's my guess he (Mangini) does not have a future in Cleveland.

Because it seems illogical to me that a new director of football would not want to hire his own coach.

And it seems equally illogical to me that Mangini would want his future in the hands of someone brought in above him who is going to take away some of his power and responsibility. The new guy is going to decide the roster, have greater input on player personnel and … well … run football. These are some of the things Mangini does now. Why would he want his future in the hands of someone who is taking that from him?

Either way — the new guy wants his own coach, and the old coach won't like his future in the hands of a new boss — the situation seems to clearly point to Mangini's future clearly being in question.

No matter what happens in tonight's game against Pittsburgh.

Dear Pat,

Isn't this move to get Mike Holmgren and turn it all over to him simply more of the same from Randy Lerner?  I don't care what his pedigree is.  If Holmgren is hired without the owner conducting any other interviews (AGAIN!!), then it's just more stupidity.  You cannot just zero in on a name.  You have to research and identify an actual person, rather than just a persona that you know through reputation alone.

If this were Bill Cowher we were talking about, then I probably would be willing to close my eyes and take the leap.  But anybody — ANYBODY — else should have to go through a selection process.  If not, then you really do not know what you are getting.

I'm not trying to trash Holmgren, by the way.  Just trying to point out that Randy Lerner seems to be falling in love all over again, and that style of infatuation management has proven to be a disaster.

Reading this e-mail causes one to put his hand to his chin and say, Hmm .. not a bad point.

However, you lose me a bit when you say you'd give Cowher credibility but not Holmgren. If memory serves correct, Holmgren took two teams to the Super Bowl, and he has as many rings as Cowher (Brian Billick has the same number, by the way).

That being said, it is a good point about falling in love before interviewing anyone. One would hope that Lerner would go through a lengthier process in hiring this time, because we all saw how it worked out last time.

It's just amazing the things we are talking about related to the Browns during the season, isn't it?

As an aside … and last … Mike … you  broke the "McManamon I Don't Mean To" rule. Which means that any time you say you don't mean to do something (I don't mean to be rude, to interrupt, etc.) you are in fact doing that very thing. So … well done trashing Mike Holmgren!

But does he want to?

Ron Wolf? Great, bring him.

But why would he do the Browns routine again?

Rich McKay?

They didn't hire him last January, so why would he now?

Ernie Accorsi?

If he's willing to leave retirement.

Those are the four names to hit the air and internet waves Sunday, as the Browns rumor mill heated up. Randy Lerner isn't confirming those names on or off the record, because he figures it's counter-productive.

But they're all on the wish list, and they're all legitimate, credible people who would bring an instant sense of reality to the team's front office.

If they can be hired.

And that's my question. Can any of them actually and truly be hired?

The Browns goals have become simple: Make like Miami.

They point to the Dolphins as their latest model (a few years ago it was New England and Philadelphia, but these things change). The Dolphins hired Bill Parcells to run the football side, he hired a GM and they together hired a coach … well … Parcells suggested a coach and Ireland … agreed.

So would it be in Cleveland — the idea being to hire a credible, respected voice and football guy taking over the football end. He would hire a GM and both of them would decide on the coach. (Hint: It's probably not going to be Eric Mangini, who appears to be Fired Man Coaching for the rest of the season.)

Holmgren might be the one guy who could be convinced to take over. He's as good a name and as good a guy as there is available right now.

But … the Browns would be putting him in a role he's never filled. In 1999, Seattle hired him away from Green Bay to be coach and GM. A few years later, Seattle took the GM duties away.

There are other questions. Holmgren might prefer to coach as opposed to take over in the front office. It also might behoove him to wait until after the season to weigh his opportunities. Let's be honest — at this point the Browns job is not the most attractive in the league.

But if he did want it … hey … it's a great idea.

Holmgren could be an outstanding football leader. He's credible, smart, football-wise, experienced and he communicates incredibly well (being able to communicate with fans and media has suddenly taken on high priority in Berea, perhaps because there's nobody there willing or able to communicate). He'd represent the team, the city, the owner extremely well.

Put Holmgren in a position like the one Parcells occupies in Miami and let him hire a GM and coach (remember Jon Gruden once worked on Holmgren's staff in Green Bay) and the Browns could have something.

There's a little trepidation given what happened in Seattle, but that would be tempered by the fact that Holmgren would be in charge and not doing two jobs.

It also would take us full circle. It was back in 1998 that Carmen Policy joked about hiring someone like Holmgren at a Cleveland City Club Forum, which led to Policy being fined for tampering.

Now there's no worry about tampering, because Holmgren is part of a Hall of Fame free agent coaching class that includes him, Gruden, Bill Cowher and Mike Shanahan.

The others in the rumor mill? They seem like longer shots.

Wolf was with the Browns once, but left in a hurry when Butch Davis basically treated him like a second-year scout.

Wolf would be outstanding, but he like Accorsi seems blissfully happy in retirement, and not likely to move out of that comfortable zone.

McKay? He couldn’t distance himself from the Browns fast enough after last January once it was evident they were hiring Eric Mangini as coach. Would he come now? Not if he had to swallow Mangini.

If he could truly take over and hire his own GM and coach, bring him in. They don't come much better than Rich McKay — or Holmgren for that matter.

Look at it this way, too: Wouldn’t we all feel a whole lot better looking to the next few years if someone like Holmgren or McKay were guiding the ship?

So perhaps Randy Lerner can salvage something from the mess of the past week.

The one thing that can't be ignored is that Lerner is liked by folks in the NFL. Because of that, they will pay more attention to helping him — provided they get the millions in the contract that they want.

Lerner may make mistakes, but he just might have enough goodwill to pull something off. It'd be 10 months too late in that he could have done something like this in January, but in this case 10 months too late would be better than never.

You just wonder if he can really and truly make everything come together to make it happen.

Because at this point when it comes to the Browns, we should all be living in Missouri.

As in they need to show us they can do what's needed.

Arrogance.

The arrogance of this coach and this team to set up this system where the coach is the voice of the team during the season, then to have that voice dismiss legitimate questions during a news conference set up to answer questions.

I counted 11 times when a question was asked and Mangini said he would not answer, with respect of course.

I know I've been critical of Mangini, but this might be more of an organizational issue rather than his alone. That being said, he's the one who set up the organization.

Would I expect every question to be answered?
No.

Would I hope they'd make an effort to answer most queries?

Yes.

Was Mangini the wrong guy to put at the podium?

Maybe. But if he wasn't the right guy then the right guy should have been there.

Some explanation could be given even if settlement negotiations are ongoing. It's almost as if the Browns don't think the fans or the media deserve an explanation.

The GM of the team was removed from his job. The coach handpicked the GM. Stand up and answer questions about it. Be accountable, like he would expect his players to be. Don't duck or hide or use coy phrases. Just answer the questions — and if you can't say so and explain why.

Randy Lerner spent two hours meeting with a couple upset season ticket holders on Tuesday. That's fine. But he or somebody else could have made 15 minutes for the media, and by extension the fans, either Monday night or sometime Tuesday. Not doing so actually might have put Mangini in a more difficult spot than he deserved.

I mean, a man dubbed smart and energetic enough to be the team's GM last January was ushered out of the building on Monday.

Is an explanation too much to ask?

2)      Then coach Eric Mangini stands up in his news conference and says he won't talk about what happened with Kokinis other than to say "it didn't work out." So the one voice that the team has isn't taking questions about it. Next thing you know the Browns will wonder why there's so much speculation and rumor about what happened. Not addressing the situation smacks of cowardice. Leadership means standing up when things are tough (see Mark Shapiro discussing and addressing the firing of Eric Wedge). In this case, Mangini and the Browns sat down. The really frightening thing: Mangini kept saying "we" when talking about the organization and the team's future, as if to imply he would be part of it long-term. Guess we now know the subject of the next paranormal activity movie.

3)      I don't know what happened that caused this to happen with Kokinis so suddenly. Randy Lerner obviously felt strong enough about something to act. I have heard that Kokinis worked in Cleveland the same way he did in Baltimore. He kept coaches hours, which means arrive early and stay late and sometimes sleep in the office. He had his scouts doing the same thing, and that didn't sit real well with all of them. He also worked quietly, behind the scenes. Kokinis was not a real public guy, though he's always been a good guy in my private dealings with him.

4)      The way this went down, though, clearly makes it seem like Kokinis is taking the fall for a bad start. Mangini somehow continues in his job, yet the GM is fired? After the majority of players brought in were ex-Jets? After the quarterback situation was completely mishandled on the field? After all the garbage we've seen on the playing field? True or not, this clearly makes it look like Mangini sacrificed his friend to save his job. And the Browns statement and Mangini's nonexplanation do nothing to rectify that impression. As for Mangini calling Kokinis a friend … I can hardly wait to see what gifts they exchange this Christmas.

5)      The flip side is that if Kokinis was simply not up to the job and the pressures of the job and losing got to him — a possibility — then Mangini was wrong to suggest him as GM and the Browns made a mistake picking him. Either way, Mangini does not come out of this well. Nor should he. He's overseeing a season of disastrous proportions.

6)      Let's not forget, too, Mangini's history in New England. He wanted a head coaching job, and Bill Belichick asked him not to take one job — with the Jets. Belichick's thinking: The rivalry and feelings between the two teams were too intense for the friendship to continue. Any other team … Belichick said, he'd do anything he could to help him. Mangini took the Jets job anyway, and he knew he was getting it as the Patriots flew back from a playoff loss in Denver. So on the team plane, Mangini was recruiting coaches from Belichick's staff to join him in New York. When Belichick heard this, he was irate, and the next day locked Mangini out of the building. Once Mangini got to New York, Spygate followed. Now we have Kokinis recommended by Mangini, hired, and fired. Err … no longer actively involved.

7)      One thing can't be debated: Kokinis waited to take the job with the Browns last January because he wanted it in his contract that he had final say over personnel. He got that. It seems quite obvious that once he got in the building, Mangini had final say over everything — including how Kokinis should act (he was not the same person he was in Baltimore), who parks where and the fact that the first floor should have plaster board covering up the cinder block. Not to mention moving the mural of the hall of famers that has never been placed in the lobby like the team said it would (though there are nice plaques with the names of the hall of famers).

8)      Walking out of Solider Field on Sunday, I heard another writer from the Chicago area describe the game this way while talking on his cell phone: "Wasn't much of a game. The Bears played really bad, and the Browns are just horrible." Sums it up, doesn't it? The Bears had a day they'd like to forget, a day when they openly admitted they played down to the Browns level — and they won BY 24 POINTS.

9)      What did Jamal Lewis mean when he said he "stuck his neck out" for the Browns? Two things: First is he is playing on a very painful ankle, one that required an offseason procedure and would sideline a lot of others players. Second is he stood up for the new regime, and did what he could to get everyone on the team to "buy in." Now he sees what's happening, and he's rightly disgusted.

10)   There's no sense hiding from another reality: The majority of the players cannot stand playing for Mangini. Yes, there is a small group that believes in him, and most are the guys he brought in from New York. But others simply don't like him. Because he belittles them in meetings, beats them down mentally and has no clear plan to win a game. Anyone who believes that this team believes in this coach is not looking at the reality on the field. Too, the players look at how he says everyone should be treated the same and they see that Mangini treats employees in the building shabbily and they think "hypocrite." As one league insider very knowledgeable in the workings of this and any team said: "That situation there will get 100 times worse before it even starts to get better."

Three and Out

There were so many letters the past eight days, so many from which to choose. I'm sticking with four as a representative sample.

Dear Pat,

Webster's defines death as "a state of being." That's a pretty good definition of the Cleveland Browns. Eric Mangini claims it's a process and he is right; it has been a slow death over the last 39 years.

Ineptitude can creep in and destroy a beloved franchise. Greedy owners, mismanagement, a revolving door of incompetent general managers, coaches, support staff  and quarterbacks can over time lead to the fall of a once storied championship team.

This has all created a dysfunctional organization that is an embarrassment to itself, its loyal fans and the city it represents. To paraphrase Einstein: "The problems that face us today as the Cleveland Browns cannot be solved by the level of thinking that has created it."

Be respectful of the "dead." Don't try and leave it on life support with a parade of old legends like Jim Brown or Bernie Kosar. It's too late simply cremate it and spread the ashes over Los Angeles, and like Braylon Edwards give it a new start.

We the Baby Boomers are tired of grieving year in and year out over this ailing parent. Let it go! It's over already

Craig Bassett

Ft Mill SC

Dear Craig,

I think many share your pain.

Dear Pat,

Is Randy Lerner clueless.  He fires a guy who did nothing. I have not seen a quote or anything else from George Kokinis since he was hired. That's like blaming the cook for the Titanic sinking.

Have a great day!

Ed Miller

New Waterford, OH

Dear Ed,

Every day is a great day when you're involved with the Cleveland Browns.

Dear Pat,

Thanks for starting the firing process of Eric Mangini. Please add Brian Daboll, the clown who is our offensive coordinator, to the list of people to be fired immediately.

I hope you can convince Randy Lerner why Mangini has to go. The players have lost all confidence in him. He is simply going to make it even worse by hanging around.

Thanks for all your help.

Best Regards

Tom Joseph

Season Ticket holder since 1979

Dear Tom,

I take no pride in "starting" a process that leads to someone losing his job. I simply have the opinion that you are right: This is going to get worse before it gets better, and I don't see it getting better with Mangini guiding the ship.

Dear Pat,

I’ve been a Browns fan all my life.  I was eight when they won it all in 1964.  I’ve seen a lot, heard a lot, etc.  I’ve lived in four different states, currently in the Chicago area.  I’m around plenty of Bears fans all the time.

Today, the day after the Bears-Browns game, I’m getting pity.  Even the most ardent Bears fans realize Sunday’s game was poorly played from the Bears standpoint, yet they had no trouble winning.

Here is the most common thing I’ve heard today – I feel sorry for the city of Cleveland that the Browns are so bad.  They say the Browns are the worst team they’ve played in they can’t remember when.  This is coming from fans whose team plays the Lions twice a year!  How sad that is.

I didn’t see the game live.  I taped it but I won’t watch it.  I was traveling back from Ohio to Chicago yesterday afternoon so I listened to the game on the Bears radio network.  More than once the Bears announcers (Jeff Joniak and Tom Thayer) asked the question – what has Brady Quinn done that he can’t even get on the field?  This was before the one series mop up at the end of the game.

To me the Browns are at the lowest point in their history.  There is no reason to be optimistic about the future.  What building blocks do they even have in place?  What free agent player other than one that no other team wants would play for this team or this coaching staff?  There are holes everywhere.  We are watching the destruction of a franchise that will take years to rebuild if it can be rebuilt.

Delusional Browns fans can quit dreaming about Bill Cowher or any other big name coach coming in to save them.  Not going to happen.

I’m still a fan but I’m becoming a very apathetic one.

Tom Shenberger

Crystal Lake,  Illinois

Dear Tom,

You sound much more than apathetic. But you also sound correct. Very, very correct.

(Want to be recognized in “Three and Out”? It’s a rare treat. Comment here or send an e-mail to pmcmanamon@thebeaconjournal.com, and put “First and 10” in the subject line.)