Mangini Will Only Have Himself To Blame
-
-
I disagree with the article. You can win in the NFL without superstars and that is how I want to win.
-
Yeah, the article makes some good points, but I disagree with it in the overall respect.
The team is much improved since Mangini came along, heck this is the best team since 1999 (forget about the fluke year 2007). Mangini did blow the 2009 draft, but that's been fixed by Heckert. We now have some players, such as Ward and Haden, who are starting to make impacts. We're still rebuilding and it's not smart to remove the general contractor for the process this short way in.
I personally do not want to keep in the rebuilding limbo and I like Mangini's philosophy's. But this team really needs to learn how to put the pressure on and win. We need do need a new offensive coordinator who has go nads and will call a decent game.
The only thing I don't like about Mangini is his stubbornness for Delhomme. But we may not know the entire story due to the attachments with Seneca and what we'll have to give up if he plays. Maybe it is the right thing to do, but we as fans are so over Delhomme.
-
Logical and sensible article. When a team is as bad as the Browns were last year, being mediocre looks like an impressive improvement arc. Any management group could have leveraged some good will this season just by not sucking ass. With a mess of draft picks, some free agent money, and quarterback play even approaching the "poor" level, the Browns would be better this year than last.
I think there are some encouraging signs, but aside from that three game stretch with McCoy, I don't think anything happened this year that should have Browns fans anointing any coaches as saviors.
As far as winning without superstars? Eh, depends on your definition. Obviously, the best teams are the teams with the top quarterbacks, especially over the past decade. The league has been dominated by Warner, Favre, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and Brees going back quite a ways... and right now it's Brady, Vick, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rivers, Flacco, Rodgers, and Ryan. There are no teams winning year after year without one of those guys. You either have one or you're looking for him. Short conversation.
All the positive feelings I have about this year's Browns are really about next year's Browns, the league and NFLPA willing. I think we've had some luck (Hillis, Moore, Roth, Yates, Benard, Rubin, McCoy), but all successful teams do. We did really well with Haden and Ward. Watson was better than expected. The result? I really do think we're within a single offseason's reach of fielding a really good team that can win more than one way.
As far as Mangini? I'm still completely ambivalent. I don't think he does anything for us somebody else couldn't do. I don't think he's that kind of coach, at least not that I've seen. I know for sure I haven't seen a serious sophisticated, multidimensional offense in Cleveland for a very long time, and until we have a Top 10-12 passing offense, we really aren't a serious threat to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We're just wa too easy to defense.
I'm seriously psyched about Colt McCoy. I know we need a #1 WR. I know we need some edge speed on defense and a better front 7 in general. But that's do-able.
-
Logical and sensible article. When a team is as bad as the Browns were last year, being mediocre looks like an impressive improvement arc. Any management group could have leveraged some good will this season just by not sucking ass. With a mess of draft picks, some free agent money, and quarterback play even approaching the "poor" level, the Browns would be better this year than last.
I think there are some encouraging signs, but aside from that three game stretch with McCoy, I don't think anything happened this year that should have Browns fans anointing any coaches as saviors.
As far as winning without superstars? Eh, depends on your definition. Obviously, the best teams are the teams with the top quarterbacks, especially over the past decade. The league has been dominated by Warner, Favre, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and Brees going back quite a ways... and right now it's Brady, Vick, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rivers, Flacco, Rodgers, and Ryan. There are no teams winning year after year without one of those guys. You either have one or you're looking for him. Short conversation.
All the positive feelings I have about this year's Browns are really about next year's Browns, the league and NFLPA willing. I think we've had some luck (Hillis, Moore, Roth, Yates, Benard, Rubin, McCoy), but all successful teams do. We did really well with Haden and Ward. Watson was better than expected. The result? I really do think we're within a single offseason's reach of fielding a really good team that can win more than one way.
As far as Mangini? I'm still completely ambivalent. I don't think he does anything for us somebody else couldn't do. I don't think he's that kind of coach, at least not that I've seen. I know for sure I haven't seen a serious sophisticated, multidimensional offense in Cleveland for a very long time, and until we have a Top 10-12 passing offense, we really aren't a serious threat to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We're just wa too easy to defense.
I'm seriously psyched about Colt McCoy. I know we need a #1 WR. I know we need some edge speed on defense and a better front 7 in general. But that's do-able.
Logical and sensible article. When a team is as bad as the Browns were last year, being mediocre looks like an impressive improvement arc. Any management group could have leveraged some good will this season just by not sucking ass. With a mess of draft picks, some free agent money, and quarterback play even approaching the "poor" level, the Browns would be better this year than last.
I think there are some encouraging signs, but aside from that three game stretch with McCoy, I don't think anything happened this year that should have Browns fans anointing any coaches as saviors.
As far as winning without superstars? Eh, depends on your definition. Obviously, the best teams are the teams with the top quarterbacks, especially over the past decade. The league has been dominated by Warner, Favre, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and Brees going back quite a ways... and right now it's Brady, Vick, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rivers, Flacco, Rodgers, and Ryan. There are no teams winning year after year without one of those guys. You either have one or you're looking for him. Short conversation.
All the positive feelings I have about this year's Browns are really about next year's Browns, the league and NFLPA willing. I think we've had some luck (Hillis, Moore, Roth, Yates, Benard, Rubin, McCoy), but all successful teams do. We did really well with Haden and Ward. Watson was better than expected. The result? I really do think we're within a single offseason's reach of fielding a really good team that can win more than one way.
As far as Mangini? I'm still completely ambivalent. I don't think he does anything for us somebody else couldn't do. I don't think he's that kind of coach, at least not that I've seen. I know for sure I haven't seen a serious sophisticated, multidimensional offense in Cleveland for a very long time, and until we have a Top 10-12 passing offense, we really aren't a serious threat to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We're just wa too easy to defense.
I'm seriously psyched about Colt McCoy. I know we need a #1 WR. I know we need some edge speed on defense and a better front 7 in general. But that's do-able.
I personally think that the guy that wrote this article has something personal against Mangini. He litterally rips everything that Mangini did even though Mangini has done alot of good. He also says that Mangini doesn't want Super stars, but he just doesn't want Superstars who are locker cancers. Plus he talks about Mangini's draft and as we all know Mangini has been fired from GM duties so we should only be looking at his coaching.
-
Its so weird that when ever someone questions if mangini is the right coach, fans cry out its because we don't like him or its the media.
This has nothing to do with anyone dis liking mangini as a person but rather as a coach.
Logical people question a coach when a team has had losing seasons. I don't think anyone would deny that there has been progress from last year. That said, this year could have been better. I feel that bad coaching cost us 2 or 3 games
-
He wins 2 in a row and a poll on Cleveland.com comes in with over 7,000 fans voted and Mangini had a 90.4%
approval rating..thats impressive. Now Grossi's intern comes out with an article after a loss? Please Child..lame
-
Logical people appraise many factors before trying to come to a conclusion.
Not just emotional knee jerk reactions at one factor they don't like, which is, in this case,
not winning enough games.
Headed in the right direction, bigtime? CHECK.
Players loving the game, playing as a team, with intensity? CHECK
Major draft picks and trades making a big difference? CHECK
Support from the players? CHECK
Being competitive in all games, especially vs better teams? CHECK
Starting to win big games decidedly? CHECK
Getting some all pro performances from high draft picks? CHECK
Mangini is fine, doing a great job, imho. Daboll... not so much, unless he has to sit on the playbook because
of the limitations of his qb's.
Note that the playbook opened up for McCoy. He is the qb that can make all those other plays work.
I say, next year, Delhomme will make a great asst qb coach. @@
-
If Mangini was so bad for this team last year then how come 24 of the 26 guys that he cut are out of the league? THAT is where I think the writer is mistaken.
This team got hot at the end of last year because Mangini built the BOTTOM of the roster first. There was enough depth with lunchpail guys to be consistent.
Does a team need superstars? No, I would say it does not but it all depends on how you define a "superstar". Do above average NFL players count? I would say that what plagues Mangini most on his roster it what's plagued every coach. There is one place where you may not need a superstar but you need someone who's above average: Quarterback.
As goes the QB, so goes the team. That's the NFL. It's a QB-driven league. When you get smart and efficient QB play you win football games. When you turn the ball over, you don't.
It doesn't really matter what we think. It's what Mike Holmgren thinks. How much improvement is enough? I don't know. You'd have to ask The Big Show. Mangini will take his criticism and if it costs him a job then so be it but don't tell me that Mangini has to blame himself for not trying to get top flight talent. If guys don't fumble and throw picks or forget how to tackle...the coach is a winner and he looks like a genius. If they don't you have a bunch of internet message board trolls like us debating whether the guy can walk and chew gum at the same time. Swinging a dead cat at nothin'.
-
A winning team makes players superstars.
How would Steve Smith look with Manning or Brady to get him the ball?
WSS
-
This article is very vague on details too. The guy writes, "His past failures, his in-game management and his stubbornness to relinquish total control of the offense will be the downfall of Mangini," but he doesn't go on to explain these in any way.
I don't care what anyone says, but you have to take our tough schedule into consideration as well. If we had the same schedule as last year, we would definitely have a better record.. I also remember Holmgren stating that whether or not Mangini stays is NOT solely dependent on wins and losses, and that he will look at the "whole picture." Unless we lose the next three games, I don't see him firing Mangini...
-
Logical people appraise many factors before trying to come to a conclusion.
Not just emotional knee jerk reactions at one factor they don't like, which is, in this case,
not winning enough games.
Headed in the right direction, bigtime? CHECK.
Players loving the game, playing as a team, with intensity? CHECK
Major draft picks and trades making a big difference? CHECK
Support from the players? CHECK
Being competitive in all games, especially vs better teams? CHECK
Starting to win big games decidedly? CHECK
Getting some all pro performances from high draft picks? CHECK
Mangini is fine, doing a great job, imho. Daboll... not so much, unless he has to sit on the playbook because
of the limitations of his qb's.
Note that the playbook opened up for McCoy. He is the qb that can make all those other plays work.
I say, next year, Delhomme will make a great asst qb coach. @@
Logical people appraise many factors before trying to come to a conclusion.
Not just emotional knee jerk reactions at one factor they don't like, which is, in this case,
not winning enough games.
Headed in the right direction, bigtime? CHECK.
Players loving the game, playing as a team, with intensity? CHECK
Major draft picks and trades making a big difference? CHECK
Support from the players? CHECK
Being competitive in all games, especially vs better teams? CHECK
Starting to win big games decidedly? CHECK
Getting some all pro performances from high draft picks? CHECK
Mangini is fine, doing a great job, imho. Daboll... not so much, unless he has to sit on the playbook because
of the limitations of his qb's.
Note that the playbook opened up for McCoy. He is the qb that can make all those other plays work.
I say, next year, Delhomme will make a great asst qb coach. @@
I like the last sentence. I think Delhomme would make a good coach, so far he is doing good mentoring Colt.
If Mangini was so bad for this team last year then how come 24 of the 26 guys that he cut are out of the league? THAT is where I think the writer is mistaken.
This team got hot at the end of last year because Mangini built the BOTTOM of the roster first. There was enough depth with lunchpail guys to be consistent.
Does a team need superstars? No, I would say it does not but it all depends on how you define a "superstar". Do above average NFL players count? I would say that what plagues Mangini most on his roster it what's plagued every coach. There is one place where you may not need a superstar but you need someone who's above average: Quarterback.
As goes the QB, so goes the team. That's the NFL. It's a QB-driven league. When you get smart and efficient QB play you win football games. When you turn the ball over, you don't.
It doesn't really matter what we think. It's what Mike Holmgren thinks. How much improvement is enough? I don't know. You'd have to ask The Big Show. Mangini will take his criticism and if it costs him a job then so be it but don't tell me that Mangini has to blame himself for not trying to get top flight talent. If guys don't fumble and throw picks or forget how to tackle...the coach is a winner and he looks like a genius. If they don't you have a bunch of internet message board trolls like us debating whether the guy can walk and chew gum at the same time. Swinging a dead cat at nothin'.
I will go with what ever Holmgren does, but I would like to see Mangini get another year.
-
Logical and sensible article. When a team is as bad as the Browns were last year, being mediocre looks like an impressive improvement arc. Any management group could have leveraged some good will this season just by not sucking ass. With a mess of draft picks, some free agent money, and quarterback play even approaching the "poor" level, the Browns would be better this year than last.
I think there are some encouraging signs, but aside from that three game stretch with McCoy, I don't think anything happened this year that should have Browns fans anointing any coaches as saviors.
As far as winning without superstars? Eh, depends on your definition. Obviously, the best teams are the teams with the top quarterbacks, especially over the past decade. The league has been dominated by Warner, Favre, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and Brees going back quite a ways... and right now it's Brady, Vick, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rivers, Flacco, Rodgers, and Ryan. There are no teams winning year after year without one of those guys. You either have one or you're looking for him. Short conversation.
All the positive feelings I have about this year's Browns are really about next year's Browns, the league and NFLPA willing. I think we've had some luck (Hillis, Moore, Roth, Yates, Benard, Rubin, McCoy), but all successful teams do. We did really well with Haden and Ward. Watson was better than expected. The result? I really do think we're within a single offseason's reach of fielding a really good team that can win more than one way.
As far as Mangini? I'm still completely ambivalent. I don't think he does anything for us somebody else couldn't do. I don't think he's that kind of coach, at least not that I've seen. I know for sure I haven't seen a serious sophisticated, multidimensional offense in Cleveland for a very long time, and until we have a Top 10-12 passing offense, we really aren't a serious threat to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We're just wa too easy to defense.
I'm seriously psyched about Colt McCoy. I know we need a #1 WR. I know we need some edge speed on defense and a better front 7 in general. But that's do-able.
Logical and sensible article. When a team is as bad as the Browns were last year, being mediocre looks like an impressive improvement arc. Any management group could have leveraged some good will this season just by not sucking ass. With a mess of draft picks, some free agent money, and quarterback play even approaching the "poor" level, the Browns would be better this year than last.
I think there are some encouraging signs, but aside from that three game stretch with McCoy, I don't think anything happened this year that should have Browns fans anointing any coaches as saviors.
As far as winning without superstars? Eh, depends on your definition. Obviously, the best teams are the teams with the top quarterbacks, especially over the past decade. The league has been dominated by Warner, Favre, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, and Brees going back quite a ways... and right now it's Brady, Vick, Roethlisberger, Brees, Rivers, Flacco, Rodgers, and Ryan. There are no teams winning year after year without one of those guys. You either have one or you're looking for him. Short conversation.
All the positive feelings I have about this year's Browns are really about next year's Browns, the league and NFLPA willing. I think we've had some luck (Hillis, Moore, Roth, Yates, Benard, Rubin, McCoy), but all successful teams do. We did really well with Haden and Ward. Watson was better than expected. The result? I really do think we're within a single offseason's reach of fielding a really good team that can win more than one way.
As far as Mangini? I'm still completely ambivalent. I don't think he does anything for us somebody else couldn't do. I don't think he's that kind of coach, at least not that I've seen. I know for sure I haven't seen a serious sophisticated, multidimensional offense in Cleveland for a very long time, and until we have a Top 10-12 passing offense, we really aren't a serious threat to Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We're just wa too easy to defense.
I'm seriously psyched about Colt McCoy. I know we need a #1 WR. I know we need some edge speed on defense and a better front 7 in general. But that's do-able.
Good post Shep, very much on target. The thing I would diss you about is short selling Heckert, he either got real lucky in Philly and last year or this guy is a first talent evalutor. I liked his trades and stated so up front a long time ago. I also liked the draft, especially getting McCoy.
We had total garbage under Sewage the worst of all times. We glorified a stiff in Tim Couch, pathetic QB, we adulated drafting Quinn a total stiff
Now we can move on and win................and YEAH THE TWO MAJOR INGREDIENTS a franchise QB and an offensive that can score...........the first gets the second
-
Its so weird that when ever someone questions if mangini is the right coach, fans cry out its because we don't like him or its the media.
This has nothing to do with anyone dis liking mangini as a person but rather as a coach.
Logical people question a coach when a team has had losing seasons. I don't think anyone would deny that there has been progress from last year. That said, this year could have been better. I feel that bad coaching cost us 2 or 3 games
The Browns are going in the right direction.
They're jelling as a team.
They're playing tough and with heart.
They're building an identity.
They have a promising young QB.
They're better than their record.
That's progress. Why mess it?
PS: Even WRRebel sees progress:
Logical people question a coach when a team has had losing seasons. I don't think anyone would deny that there has been progress from last year. That said, this year could have been better.
-
FIRE MANGINI..........WITH ALL THIS TALENT WE SHOULD BE IN THE FOCKING SUPERBOWL!!!!!!
-
This article is very vague on details too. The guy writes, "His past failures, his in-game management and his stubbornness to relinquish total control of the offense will be the downfall of Mangini," but he doesn't go on to explain these in any way.
I don't care what anyone says, but you have to take our tough schedule into consideration as well. If we had the same schedule as last year, we would definitely have a better record.. I also remember Holmgren stating that whether or not Mangini stays is NOT solely dependent on wins and losses, and that he will look at the "whole picture." Unless we lose the next three games, I don't see him firing Mangini...
This article is very vague on details too. The guy writes, "His past failures, his in-game management and his stubbornness to relinquish total control of the offense will be the downfall of Mangini," but he doesn't go on to explain these in any way.
I don't care what anyone says, but you have to take our tough schedule into consideration as well. If we had the same schedule as last year, we would definitely have a better record.. I also remember Holmgren stating that whether or not Mangini stays is NOT solely dependent on wins and losses, and that he will look at the "whole picture." Unless we lose the next three games, I don't see him firing Mangini...
Thank you. IMHO, if Holmgren would make his decision about Mangini solely based on win-lass record, he's a damn FOOL! Mangini will be here, or not, next year based on Holmgren's analysis, & I feel that analysis will go into much more depth than ins & losses. I actually feel pretty good knowing that we Fans will not influence that decision as it is one best left to experts. Whether or not we agree with that decision doesn't matter. We'll just have to see what happens, but I'm sick of hearing Grossi & his cronies talking about every decision Mangini makes as if he's trying to save his job. I think he's above that....I believe he Coaches by following his principles...Whether or not that's enough to bring him back only time will tell. I want Mangini back, but I'll remain a Brown's Fan no matter what.
Mike
-
http://www.playingfieldpromotions.com/book...-jon-gruden.php
Really good speaker
-
http://www.playingfieldpromotions.com/book...-jon-gruden.php
Really good speaker
http://www.playingfieldpromotions.com/book...-jon-gruden.php
Really good speaker
I take it that's the escort service you 2 met through?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login