Curious
-
A lot of people claimed that the firing of Chud after just one year in his position was premature because he didn't have enough time or enough to work with. Is anyone going to claim the same for Banner and Lombardi now?
My guess is that the explanation will now be, "Well, it was Chud's first year as a HC at all; Banner and Lombardi have had their chances prior to this." Maybe that's a valid point, but it's not really what I heard people (at least most people) saying during the Chud discussions. What I heard was that you don't fire a HC (whether it's his first year as a HC at all or not) after just one year with a club. Is it okay to do that with FO personnel?
Personally, I'm glad all three of them are gone. I think they deserved to be let go after last year. I do still think that Chud was misled from the beginning about what was going to be expected of him in 2013, and I feel bad about that. I don't think it was reason enough to keep him on for another year, though, when it did not seem that he'd done anything constructive.
Chud is just the backdrop to the question, though. My actual question is: Is it wrong to fire a HC after his first year with a team, but fine to fire a GM/CEO after his first (full) season with a team?
A lot of people claimed that the firing of Chud after just one year in his position was premature because he didn't have enough time or enough to work with. Is anyone going to claim the same for Banner and Lombardi now?
My guess is that the explanation will now be, "Well, it was Chud's first year as a HC at all; Banner and Lombardi have had their chances prior to this." Maybe that's a valid point, but it's not really what I heard people (at least most people) saying during the Chud discussions. What I heard was that you don't fire a HC (whether it's his first year as a HC at all or not) after just one year with a club. Is it okay to do that with FO personnel?
Personally, I'm glad all three of them are gone. I think they deserved to be let go after last year. I do still think that Chud was misled from the beginning about what was going to be expected of him in 2013, and I feel bad about that. I don't think it was reason enough to keep him on for another year, though, when it did not seem that he'd done anything constructive.
Chud is just the backdrop to the question, though. My actual question is: Is it wrong to fire a HC after his first year with a team, but fine to fire a GM/CEO after his first (full) season with a team?
The firing of Chud was an indictment on the front office ... because he was their hire.
We were mad that they fucked up, we had to start over, and that we looked like idiots giving the guy only one year.
The firing of the Banner/Lombardi shows accountability Now you are actually firing the guys that fucked the whole thing up.
Ya, it's different, because the coach is dependent on what the organization gives him. Firing him just showed that THEY didn't know what they were doing.
I think to the average fan, the real fan, this latest move feels like Jimmy is working hard to get this right, and not dependent on anybody else (Banner) influencing him.
He's walking the walk.
Now if he fires Farmer and Pettine next year ... lol.
Zombo
-
I agree that the coach is dependent on what the organization gives them. I don't completely agree that Chud's firing ONLY shows that Banner and Lombardi didn't know what they were doing (although I do think it shows that). Pettine and Shanahan have now both talked about making what they are given work, and I'm hoping that they can do that. To me, that's the difference Haslam may be trying to find: every coach is dependent on what the organization gives them, but only some coaches find a way to make that work. Chud couldn't make it work; let's hope Pettine can.
-
I don't think they were pleased they hired Chud in the first place... They missed out on a lot of coaches last year, and I think that added to all the candidates who refused interviews and turned us down this year, and you have a problem. Haslam realized what the problem was, and fixed it. Get rid of the suits, and bring in the "football guys"...
To me, you can fire whoever you want. The sooner the better in some cases...
#Justsayin' -
I agree that the coach is dependent on what the organization gives them. I don't completely agree that Chud's firing ONLY shows that Banner and Lombardi didn't know what they were doing (although I do think it shows that). Pettine and Shanahan have now both talked about making what they are given work, and I'm hoping that they can do that. To me, that's the difference Haslam may be trying to find: every coach is dependent on what the organization gives them, but only some coaches find a way to make that work. Chud couldn't make it work; let's hope Pettine can.
I agree that the coach is dependent on what the organization gives them. I don't completely agree that Chud's firing ONLY shows that Banner and Lombardi didn't know what they were doing (although I do think it shows that). Pettine and Shanahan have now both talked about making what they are given work, and I'm hoping that they can do that. To me, that's the difference Haslam may be trying to find: every coach is dependent on what the organization gives them, but only some coaches find a way to make that work. Chud couldn't make it work; let's hope Pettine can.
There was no way they could put Haslam, Banner, Lombardi, Farmer, Chud, Turner, and Horton into a room and make a decision about the direction of the football team... Just like any committee (including government), the more opinions you get, the less effective it is... I can see a room with Haslam, Farmer, Pettine, and Shanahan. 3 guys who know what they want to do, and how to do it, led by an owner who just wants to win... sounds pretty good to me.
#Justsayin' -
I don't think they were pleased they hired Chud in the first place... They missed out on a lot of coaches last year, and I think that added to all the candidates who refused interviews and turned us down this year, and you have a problem. Haslam realized what the problem was, and fixed it. Get rid of the suits, and bring in the "football guys"...
To me, you can fire whoever you want. The sooner the better in some cases...
I don't think they were pleased they hired Chud in the first place... They missed out on a lot of coaches last year, and I think that added to all the candidates who refused interviews and turned us down this year, and you have a problem. Haslam realized what the problem was, and fixed it. Get rid of the suits, and bring in the "football guys"...
To me, you can fire whoever you want. The sooner the better in some cases...
I still think it goes down to the fact that LomBanner began fumbling and bumbling around after they fired Chud......and leading JH to believe that they had the plan in place to replace him, which, apparently, they didn't.
I think Lombardi promised to deliver Josh McDaniels. When McDaniels said nyet, that surprised JH. When Gase said nyet, that ruffled JH.
JH heard about Banner and Lombardi being radioactive.....and when it turned out to be true he just decided to turn Godzilla on them and eat their radioactivity.
-
I agree that the coach is dependent on what the organization gives them. I don't completely agree that Chud's firing ONLY shows that Banner and Lombardi didn't know what they were doing (although I do think it shows that). Pettine and Shanahan have now both talked about making what they are given work, and I'm hoping that they can do that. To me, that's the difference Haslam may be trying to find: every coach is dependent on what the organization gives them, but only some coaches find a way to make that work. Chud couldn't make it work; let's hope Pettine can.
There was no way they could put Haslam, Banner, Lombardi, Farmer, Chud, Turner, and Horton into a room and make a decision about the direction of the football team... Just like any committee (including government), the more opinions you get, the less effective it is... I can see a room with Haslam, Farmer, Pettine, and Shanahan. 3 guys who know what they want to do, and how to do it, led by an owner who just wants to win... sounds pretty good to me.
We haven't seen enough of Haslem to make a call yet IMO. Let's just hope it's not Jerry Jones, Farmer, Pettine and ShanahanThere was no way they could put Haslam, Banner, Lombardi, Farmer, Chud, Turner, and Horton into a room and make a decision about the direction of the football team... Just like any committee (including government), the more opinions you get, the less effective it is... I can see a room with Haslam, Farmer, Pettine, and Shanahan. 3 guys who know what they want to do, and how to do it, led by an owner who just wants to win... sounds pretty good to me.
-
I don't think they were pleased they hired Chud in the first place... They missed out on a lot of coaches last year, and I think that added to all the candidates who refused interviews and turned us down this year, and you have a problem. Haslam realized what the problem was, and fixed it. Get rid of the suits, and bring in the "football guys"...
To me, you can fire whoever you want. The sooner the better in some cases...
I don't think they were pleased they hired Chud in the first place... They missed out on a lot of coaches last year, and I think that added to all the candidates who refused interviews and turned us down this year, and you have a problem. Haslam realized what the problem was, and fixed it. Get rid of the suits, and bring in the "football guys"...
To me, you can fire whoever you want. The sooner the better in some cases...
Right. They missed out on the guys they wanted LAST season... And I believe they may have missed out on someone they wanted big time this season as well. (That being said, I have no issues with Pettine at all - He looks like the right choice to me). That's the reason Chud was fired and this offseason is the reason behind the "Restructuring" that we're seeing this morning.
-
I agree with thenew23. I think Haslam is recognizing the entire hiring of Chud as a bad move from the beginning, and that, in combination with a number of mistakes/disagreements since, has probably played a part in the firing of Banner and Lombardi.
So here's the line of reasoning I'm seeing here:
1. Haslam is obviously not happy with Banner and Lombardi.
2. Part of that probably has to do with how poorly last year went and with the lack of progress.
3. Someone must have thought Chud had something to do with that, because he's gone now.
4. As Chud and at least some of the people who hired him are now gone, his hiring is probably seen (at least by Haslam) as a mistake in the first place.
5. If it was a mistake to hire Chud in the first place and it didn't seem to yield any positive results, it would have made little sense to hang onto him for another year.
-
I don't think they were pleased they hired Chud in the first place... They missed out on a lot of coaches last year, and I think that added to all the candidates who refused interviews and turned us down this year, and you have a problem. Haslam realized what the problem was, and fixed it. Get rid of the suits, and bring in the "football guys"...
To me, you can fire whoever you want. The sooner the better in some cases...
I still think it goes down to the fact that LomBanner began fumbling and bumbling around after they fired Chud......and leading JH to believe that they had the plan in place to replace him, which, apparently, they didn't.
I think Lombardi promised to deliver Josh McDaniels. When McDaniels said nyet, that surprised JH. When Gase said nyet, that ruffled JH.
JH heard about Banner and Lombardi being radioactive.....and when it turned out to be true he just decided to turn Godzilla on them and eat their radioactivity.
I still think it goes down to the fact that LomBanner began fumbling and bumbling around after they fired Chud......and leading JH to believe that they had the plan in place to replace him, which, apparently, they didn't.
I think Lombardi promised to deliver Josh McDaniels. When McDaniels said nyet, that surprised JH. When Gase said nyet, that ruffled JH.
JH heard about Banner and Lombardi being radioactive.....and when it turned out to be true he just decided to turn Godzilla on them and eat their radioactivity.
If it is WAS McDaniels who turned the Browns down and not the other way around, then it's a blessing in disguise.
-
I believe that the firing of Chud was driven by Banner and Lombardi. I think Haslam took them on their word it was the right move. I think he also took them at their word they had great candidates in the bag. After that blew up Haslam started to get feedback as to why candidates were turning down the jobs. Further feedback came at the Pro Bowl from sources outside the team. At the end of the day he did the math. 1) They hired Chud 2) They blew the draft and 3) they misled him on the ease of getting a new qualified coach. It didn't help that the way Banner has handled the media after the Chud firing has been negligently bad. GREAT DAY they are gone.
-
I believe that the firing of Chud was driven by Banner and Lombardi. I think Haslam took them on their word it was the right move. I think he also took them at their word they had great candidates in the bag. After that blew up Haslam started to get feedback as to why candidates were turning down the jobs. Further feedback came at the Pro Bowl from sources outside the team. At the end of the day he did the math. 1) They hired Chud 2) They blew the draft and 3) they misled him on the ease of getting a new qualified coach. It didn't help that the way Banner has handled the media after the Chud firing has been negligently bad. GREAT DAY they are gone.
I believe that the firing of Chud was driven by Banner and Lombardi. I think Haslam took them on their word it was the right move. I think he also took them at their word they had great candidates in the bag. After that blew up Haslam started to get feedback as to why candidates were turning down the jobs. Further feedback came at the Pro Bowl from sources outside the team. At the end of the day he did the math. 1) They hired Chud 2) They blew the draft and 3) they misled him on the ease of getting a new qualified coach. It didn't help that the way Banner has handled the media after the Chud firing has been negligently bad. GREAT DAY they are gone.
I think you mean the Super Bowl, not the Pro Bowl.
-
I believe that the firing of Chud was driven by Banner and Lombardi. I think Haslam took them on their word it was the right move. I think he also took them at their word they had great candidates in the bag. After that blew up Haslam started to get feedback as to why candidates were turning down the jobs. Further feedback came at the Pro Bowl from sources outside the team. At the end of the day he did the math. 1) They hired Chud 2) They blew the draft and 3) they misled him on the ease of getting a new qualified coach. It didn't help that the way Banner has handled the media after the Chud firing has been negligently bad. GREAT DAY they are gone.
I think you mean the Super Bowl, not the Pro Bowl.
I think you mean the Super Bowl, not the Pro Bowl.
Yes I did mean Super Bowl. LOL realistically you could get negative feedback on Lombardi at the Super Bowl, Pro Bowl, Toilet Bowl, Punch Bowl,......bowling............just about anywhere
-
A lot of people claimed that the firing of Chud after just one year in his position was premature because he didn't have enough time or enough to work with. Is anyone going to claim the same for Banner and Lombardi now?
My guess is that the explanation will now be, "Well, it was Chud's first year as a HC at all; Banner and Lombardi have had their chances prior to this." Maybe that's a valid point, but it's not really what I heard people (at least most people) saying during the Chud discussions. What I heard was that you don't fire a HC (whether it's his first year as a HC at all or not) after just one year with a club. Is it okay to do that with FO personnel?
Personally, I'm glad all three of them are gone. I think they deserved to be let go after last year. I do still think that Chud was misled from the beginning about what was going to be expected of him in 2013, and I feel bad about that. I don't think it was reason enough to keep him on for another year, though, when it did not seem that he'd done anything constructive.
Chud is just the backdrop to the question, though. My actual question is: Is it wrong to fire a HC after his first year with a team, but fine to fire a GM/CEO after his first (full) season with a team?
The firing of Chud was an indictment on the front office ... because he was their hire.
We were mad that they fucked up, we had to start over, and that we looked like idiots giving the guy only one year.
The firing of the Banner/Lombardi shows accountability Now you are actually firing the guys that fucked the whole thing up.
Ya, it's different, because the coach is dependent on what the organization gives him. Firing him just showed that THEY didn't know what they were doing.
I think to the average fan, the real fan, this latest move feels like Jimmy is working hard to get this right, and not dependent on anybody else (Banner) influencing him.
He's walking the walk.
Now if he fires Farmer and Pettine next year ... lol.
Zombo
Zombo said:
The firing of Chud was an indictment on the front office ... because he was their hire.
We were mad that they fucked up, we had to start over, and that we looked like idiots giving the guy only one year.
The firing of the Banner/Lombardi shows accountability Now you are actually firing the guys that fucked the whole thing up.
Ya, it's different, because the coach is dependent on what the organization gives him. Firing him just showed that THEY didn't know what they were doing.
I think to the average fan, the real fan, this latest move feels like Jimmy is working hard to get this right, and not dependent on anybody else (Banner) influencing him.
He's walking the walk.
Now if he fires Farmer and Pettine next year ... lol.
Zombo
If they fire Farmer and Pettine next season,they (the NFL) oughta rebuke Jimmy's license to own an NFL team,and force him to sell the Browns. because if this kind of shit keeps up.The NFL ultimately loses money on some of the revenue sharing and "other" monies. The NFL does NOT lose money.
-
jcam222, so you think Lombardi and Banner pushed the hiring AND the firing of Chud? They may well have. If they did, they deserve to each be fired twice.
-
jcam222, so you think Lombardi and Banner pushed the hiring AND the firing of Chud? They may well have. If they did, they deserve to each be fired twice.
jcam222, so you think Lombardi and Banner pushed the hiring AND the firing of Chud? They may well have. If they did, they deserve to each be fired twice.
Yes that is exactly what I think. I think they settled for him and when the saw the ship sinking they tried to make him the scapegoat.
-
jcam222, so you think Lombardi and Banner pushed the hiring AND the firing of Chud? They may well have. If they did, they deserve to each be fired twice.
jcam222, so you think Lombardi and Banner pushed the hiring AND the firing of Chud? They may well have. If they did, they deserve to each be fired twice.
To be fair it's really impossible to guess what really happened.
IMO haslam saw a 4-12 regression with a more talented team than the year prior.
I think Haslam was feeling a little Sweet Brown
-
I believe that the firing of Chud was driven by Banner and Lombardi. I think Haslam took them on their word it was the right move. I think he also took them at their word they had great candidates in the bag. After that blew up Haslam started to get feedback as to why candidates were turning down the jobs. Further feedback came at the Pro Bowl from sources outside the team. At the end of the day he did the math. 1) They hired Chud 2) They blew the draft and 3) they misled him on the ease of getting a new qualified coach. It didn't help that the way Banner has handled the media after the Chud firing has been negligently bad. GREAT DAY they are gone.
I believe that the firing of Chud was driven by Banner and Lombardi. I think Haslam took them on their word it was the right move. I think he also took them at their word they had great candidates in the bag. After that blew up Haslam started to get feedback as to why candidates were turning down the jobs. Further feedback came at the Pro Bowl from sources outside the team. At the end of the day he did the math. 1) They hired Chud 2) They blew the draft and 3) they misled him on the ease of getting a new qualified coach. It didn't help that the way Banner has handled the media after the Chud firing has been negligently bad. GREAT DAY they are gone.
Yes there was feedback at the Pro Bowl- with guys telling Gordon "hang in there for another year or two, and you can get out".
@mike-h said:
I think the firing of Lombardi and Banner goes deeper than Chud. Jimmy is the brass, no one else. Everyone knows that now.
KISS THE RING BITCHES
Day late, dollar short Mike. I truly believe the above that Banner & Lombardi made Chud the scapegoat for their bad decisions. Sure they made a good one- unloading Richardson for a first rounder- but we don't have a running game because you foisted Willis Freaking MCGahee on him, and expected better?
IMHO the saddest part of this whole scenario is Banner's arrogance- which (as Grossi stated) led to his meteoric fall was "I think Mike Lombardi is the tits as a GM- you asshole fans think you know better, but you don't.
So as some of the reports now surfacing say- Chud was forced to eat Banner and Lombardi's shit daily. And got made the fall guy for their incompetence. It didn't help we went through qbs like a revolving door.
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