Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Untouchable?

Untouchable?

The Browns Board
29 12 1.6k
  • T The Cysko Kid

    @bbedward said:

    Little got demoted and the #3 receiver that replaced him ended up being worse.

    If that is remotely true Lombardi should be fired for the 6th time.

    That's not chuds call to make. I can't pick and choose what jobs I want to do at work and he can't either.

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    That's not chuds call to make. I can't pick and choose what jobs I want to do at work and he can't either.

    But assuming your boss hired you because he thinks you know what you are doing....

    WSS

    www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
  • W Westside Steve

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    That's not chuds call to make. I can't pick and choose what jobs I want to do at work and he can't either.

    But assuming your boss hired you because he thinks you know what you are doing....

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    But assuming your boss hired you because he thinks you know what you are doing....

    WSS

    Perhaps it became clear he didn't know what he was doing. A billion dollar business where the entire public is calling for your head when you fail is no place for a bumbler to get on the job training

    Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind...
    W 1 Reply

  • People (both people on the boards and media folks) keep asking, "Well, what guarantee does the next guy have that this won't happen to him?" He doesn't. SHOULD he? Why does everyone act like it is so unbelievable that the FO won't guarantee that a coach gets to keep his job after the first season even if he sucks? That seems crazy to me. Now, if the FO was like, "Either come in and win the AFC in 2014 or get out!" then yeah, that's too much to ask. But is it too much to ask that the coach who gets hired comes in and makes ANY improvement at all over the course of a season? Everyone is like, "Why would any coach agree to that?!" What does that mean? Does every potential coach in the league have the right to demand a consequence-free first year?

    C 1 Reply
  • T The Cysko Kid

    @westside-steve said:

    But assuming your boss hired you because he thinks you know what you are doing....

    WSS

    Perhaps it became clear he didn't know what he was doing. A billion dollar business where the entire public is calling for your head when you fail is no place for a bumbler to get on the job training

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    Perhaps it became clear he didn't know what he was doing. A billion dollar business where the entire public is calling for your head when you fail is no place for a bumbler to get on the job training

    Well that is certainly a possibility. It would seem to me that with an established and professional offensive and defensive coordinator your coaching staff should be able to scrape together an idea who should start and who shouldn't. Especially more than a dickhead and a two bit chisler like Lombardi and Banner.

    Further remember whose job it was to hire these three coaches. So if somebody doesn't know shit from shinola about it maybe it's them.

    WSS

    www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons

  • And wasn't it banner, the guy who knows everything about coaching, who ran Andy Reid out of town?

    WSS

    www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
  • W Westside Steve

    And wasn't it banner, the guy who knows everything about coaching, who ran Andy Reid out of town?

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    And wasn't it banner, the guy who knows everything about coaching, who ran Andy Reid out of town?

    WSS

    Banner wasn't there when they fired Andy Reid, think that was the owner's move.

  • For the record, I didn't know who the fuck Rob Chudzinski was when we hired him....I vaguely recollected the name then someone said he used to be our o coordinator. Fine, didn't like the hiring cause I"m like can't we get someone here with a proven track record? Well apparently we couldn't. Fuck, we were talking to a CFL guy before we talked to Chud. "BUT"...we fucking hired Chud and he did bring in Turner and Horton. Every last single fucking person here knew that this was going to be a rebuild. We wanted to toss out the Shurm years and start over. Fine. I saw some of things that were being done and I knew from the start that this was going to be a painful year. Than Weeden went down and Hoyer came in....now there seemed to be a glimmer of hope that maybe we could actually win the division with the rest of the teams struggling. Hoyer went down, it wasn't to be. Still too many holes left over from the Shurm era. These things can't be fixed in a year. They just can't. Whether you fuckers like Chuds or not is beside the point...the "optics" of firing yet another coach after such an appalingly short tenure will be DEVESTATING to this franchise. If anything we needed to give Chud time just to tell the rest of the league we're done selling coaches down the road after 2 years. God if it had lasted 2 years that would have been better than this and even 2 years is terrible. This is such a disaster that I think very few of you realize. If this was the only guy we'd let go after a short time it woudl be one thing...we could get away with it. We can't get away with this. The only reason to fire Chud at this point in time was if on monday they announced their new HC that was onboard before the firing. That was the only way this was remotely acceptable. Get ready for a humiliating offseason kids. If you thought Chip made our FO look like assholes last year just wait. McDaniels? Leave NE where he's being groomed to take over for Belichick? Leave to come to CLeveland where even his mentor flailed about? You better beleive that Belichick told him if you want to go that's fine, but don't even think about going to that place.

    Oh and with Horton being gone a virtual certainty you can kiss goodbye whatever good things we did on defense this year. Just as an example, if were to say get that DC from Seattle....a good part of our front 7 doesn't fit what he likes to do even though they run 3-4 personnel. Sheard and Kruger are out for sure...Mingo "might" stay as he fits more what they like to do with their OLB's. Next year WILL be a rebuild and we'll be lucky if we win 4 games.

  • So, ClevFan, if I understand your post correctly, you don't think Chud should have been expected to do anything this year? It should have been a free year and a free paycheck for him? No need to do anything at all?

  • S Spectralcow

    So, ClevFan, if I understand your post correctly, you don't think Chud should have been expected to do anything this year? It should have been a free year and a free paycheck for him? No need to do anything at all?

    @spectralcow said:

    So, ClevFan, if I understand your post correctly, you don't think Chud should have been expected to do anything this year? It should have been a free year and a free paycheck for him? No need to do anything at all?

    There was nothing that could have been done this year under any coach. Fucking Vince Lombardi could have come out of his grave and maybe gotten us 1-2 extra wins. I'm dead fucking serious. The time to evaluate this team and the coaches under a more intense microscope would have been the next few years when they would have gotten all their pieces together. It takes time in the NFL to build a team. Now we're gonna beg one fgt after another this offseason to come here. On the field we weren't the worst team in this league by far this year, yet we are the laughing stock....and it's gonna get worse this offseason.

  • I'm not sure that I agree. When I think of the difference between a "good coach" and a "bad coach", I think that the "good coach" can do a better job with the same personnel as the "bad coach". Getting the team to perform better AFTER you've gotten better players doesn't necessarily signal to me that you're a better coach than the last guy (it just signals that you have better players than he had).

    The Browns blew a number of leads late in the game this year. That, I think, is at least partially a coaching issue. Like has been said, there were teams with less talent who did better. Plus, if I recall correctly, Banner and Haslam didn't specifically mention more wins (or at least not too often). What they seemed to me to be saying was that they didn't see improvement. There could have been improvement (or the appearance of the potential for improvement) without additional wins.

    Now, I'll state it again to be clear: I think Chud did get the shaft from the FO in a way, but not because he just automatically deserved another year or because he showed any improvement. I think he got the shaft because I think the FO gave him the impression that it was okay to not improve until after the draft and then they crucified him for it. Haslam says that he said before the season started that they needed to seem improvement between the first three games and the last three games, and I believe he did say that. However, to me, the Browns FO gave the distinct impression during the season that they didn't really expect anything at all until the 2014 Draft. Then, suddenly, at the end of the season, they went back to saying they had expected to see improvement.

  • S Spectralcow

    People (both people on the boards and media folks) keep asking, "Well, what guarantee does the next guy have that this won't happen to him?" He doesn't. SHOULD he? Why does everyone act like it is so unbelievable that the FO won't guarantee that a coach gets to keep his job after the first season even if he sucks? That seems crazy to me. Now, if the FO was like, "Either come in and win the AFC in 2014 or get out!" then yeah, that's too much to ask. But is it too much to ask that the coach who gets hired comes in and makes ANY improvement at all over the course of a season? Everyone is like, "Why would any coach agree to that?!" What does that mean? Does every potential coach in the league have the right to demand a consequence-free first year?

    @spectralcow said:

    People (both people on the boards and media folks) keep asking, "Well, what guarantee does the next guy have that this won't happen to him?" He doesn't. SHOULD he? Why does everyone act like it is so unbelievable that the FO won't guarantee that a coach gets to keep his job after the first season even if he sucks? That seems crazy to me. Now, if the FO was like, "Either come in and win the AFC in 2014 or get out!" then yeah, that's too much to ask. But is it too much to ask that the coach who gets hired comes in and makes ANY improvement at all over the course of a season? Everyone is like, "Why would any coach agree to that?!" What does that mean? Does every potential coach in the league have the right to demand a consequence-free first year?

    1) You're basing your view that Chud sucked as a coach on the teams record. There's so many variables to this it's not worth getting into. But if you don't intrinsically understand this than you don't understand football. Again, if we had a name like Gruden or Cowher waiting on board this firing makes sense. Seeing as we don't, seeing as we're going to begging CFL fgts to come coach this team....this firing makes "zero" sense.

    2) The next coach absolutely should have a gurantee he lasts at least 3 years barring some kind of kiddie porn disclosure or something like making foot fetish video's (wait)....anyway, barring some kind of Sandusky'ing around, he should get 3 years to build the team he wants. If you think the Cleveland Browns can tell someone like Gruden, for one, that he has to play a 3-4 cause that's the personnel we got....you think he's gonna come here? You're high

  • 1). You're assuming I'm basing my view on Chud on the win-loss record. You know what they say about assuming; and you're wrong. I'm basing it on play-calling, personnel decisions, and the fact that I didn't see how the team improved at all.

    2). I just disagree. And I don't think we're going to resolve this one. I don't think someone should get 3 years of guaranteed paychecks with no guarantee or indication of results. I just don't. Gruden isn't coming, regardless. I think you're assuming that whomever this hypothetical guy is, he'll definitely be able to improve things if he's given that three years. But what if he's not? 3 years is a LOT of time and money invested to get no return at all. Not every guy in football is going to be able to do what needs to be done to improve a team like the Browns. In order to figure out whether or not you've got the guy who can do it, you've got to check in and see if he's making progress. You and I disagree on when that "checking in" needs to be made. I think 3 years (or even 2 years) is too large of an investment to still have the potential for getting nothing back.

Log in to reply