Skip to content

disconnect with reality in this board on bounty hunter/Kitchens and the search....

The Browns Board
47 23 1.2k
  • If we're looking for a coach longterm, I see no issue why Williams - at 60 years old, would turn down a 3 year contract that listed Kitch as HCIN thus giving the chance to groom our guys in house.   This would also establish something we've not had in my lifetime - coaching continuity. 

    Just something Dorsey would think about I hope.

    Dutch OvenD Dutch Oven wrote on last edited by
    #19

    @tiamat63 said:

    If we're looking for a coach longterm, I see no issue why Williams - at 60 years old, would turn down a 3 year contract that listed Kitch as HCIN thus giving the chance to groom our guys in house.   This would also establish something we've not had in my lifetime - coaching continuity. 

    Just something Dorsey would think about I hope.

    Continuity? The Browns?

    The hell you say! 🙂

  • @flugel said:

    You are correct!  Nobody said they were the favorites.  Welcome to the World according to Taco that doesn't include reading comprehension...

    nonsense...there is a whole thread where several posters pontificate on how we may just be interviewing all these others to 'make it look right' and dorsey and williams are going to 

    have a sit down where they hash it all out and get it done.  Pure fantasy.  

    The farther bounty hunter gets from this organization the better.  Im not at all convinced though that there isnt still a small chance he won't be retained as DC.  He exhibits such delusional and grandiose thought content("I could have 6 HC jobs without even showing up for the interview") that he may actually feel another organization would want him as a head coach(they don't) and it's not a sure thing that with his history he could even latch on as a DC.....so coming back here as DC, if offered, would probably be better for him than being unemployed or a position coach...but who knows.

    I'm all for a complete overhaul though

    runyon27R runyon27 wrote on last edited by
    #20

    @tacosman said:

    nonsense...there is a whole thread where several posters pontificate on how we may just be interviewing all these others to 'make it look right' and dorsey and williams are going to 

    have a sit down where they hash it all out and get it done.  Pure fantasy.  

    The farther bounty hunter gets from this organization the better.  Im not at all convinced though that there isnt still a small chance he won't be retained as DC.  He exhibits such delusional and grandiose thought content("I could have 6 HC jobs without even showing up for the interview") that he may actually feel another organization would want him as a head coach(they don't) and it's not a sure thing that with his history he could even latch on as a DC.....so coming back here as DC, if offered, would probably be better for him than being unemployed or a position coach...but who knows.

    I'm all for a complete overhaul though

    This post is funny. Its not like Greg Williams was a bum out on the street, untouchable before we made him DC. He was let go as part of the Rams overhaul. And BTW the Rams defense was better under Williams then it has been under Phillips and McVeigh. I like wins, when Williams coached he won, players responded to the discipline he brought.  I would like to keep him either as HC or DC, if I can only keep one, I keep Kitchens.

  • Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #21

    This thread is the equivalent of bursting into a bar and yelling, "I'll fight the biggest guy in the room!"

  • This thread is the equivalent of bursting into a bar and yelling, "I'll fight the biggest guy in the room!"

    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #22

    @tour2ma said:

    This thread is the equivalent of bursting into a bar and yelling, "I'll fight the biggest guy in the room!"

    That’s exactly how our QB operates. 

    Who said it? 

    “Baker Mayfield enters a room and looks for the biggest fight”

  • lodiloboL lodilobo wrote on last edited by
    #23

    While it is always a good idea to interview as many applicants as possible, to me, it defies logic to hire anyone other than Williams as HC, and try to retain Kitchens as OC. We have a team that has been a perennial loser since it's beginning with a couple exception here and there. We finally find a coaching chemistry that produces wins, players who resemble real NFL players, not lethargic individuals playing at half speed. This is something that we haven't seen in forever. We have a "dangerous" qb, a young,talented defense, and appear to be a very good team, improving. So...why in the Hell would you destroy that, to bring some college coach or a washed up big name NFL coach in here, not knowing the results? We already know what we have with Williams and Kitchen, and it will only improve with a few new players at key positions. If we hire Josh McDaniels or some other idiot, he is sure to want his own staff. Then he will want his own players, his own defensive game plan, his own offensive game plane, etc. What we have is working, but in it's infancy. To destroy that based on hope would be stupid. I don't care if a lot of people don't like Williams. How many people like Bellichik?....Parcells? Whatever they do will be acceptable, because Dorsey might know slightly more than I do, but if it blows up in our faces, and we are looking at less wins in 2019, I will be here to say "I told you so".

  • @flugel said:

    You are correct!  Nobody said they were the favorites.  Welcome to the World according to Taco that doesn't include reading comprehension...

    nonsense...there is a whole thread where several posters pontificate on how we may just be interviewing all these others to 'make it look right' and dorsey and williams are going to 

    have a sit down where they hash it all out and get it done.  Pure fantasy.  

    The farther bounty hunter gets from this organization the better.  Im not at all convinced though that there isnt still a small chance he won't be retained as DC.  He exhibits such delusional and grandiose thought content("I could have 6 HC jobs without even showing up for the interview") that he may actually feel another organization would want him as a head coach(they don't) and it's not a sure thing that with his history he could even latch on as a DC.....so coming back here as DC, if offered, would probably be better for him than being unemployed or a position coach...but who knows.

    I'm all for a complete overhaul though

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by
    #24

    @tacosman said:

    nonsense...there is a whole thread where several posters pontificate on how we may just be interviewing all these others to 'make it look right' and dorsey and williams are going to 

    have a sit down where they hash it all out and get it done.  Pure fantasy.  

    1) The farther bounty hunter gets from this organization the better.  Im not at all convinced though that there isnt still a small chance he won't be retained as DC.  He exhibits such delusional and grandiose thought content("I could have 6 HC jobs without even showing up for the interview") that he may actually feel another organization would want him as a head coach(they don't) and it's not a sure thing that with his history he could even latch on as a DC.....so coming back here as DC, if offered, would probably be better for him than being unemployed or a position coach...but who knows.

    2) I'm all for a complete overhaul though

    1) Bountygate was six years ago. Williams paid his dues for conspiring in that scheme. So you're trying to tell me people can't change. FWIW, if the Browns don't retain Williams, he's certain to get at least a couple Head Coaching interviews from other teams based on his 5-2 interim record with the Browns. 

    2) Sure, we've had more complete overhauls and blow up of the coaching staff and Front Office than I can count. I had to look it up, since 1999, the Browns have gone through 10 head coaches, rivaling the number of names on that Quarterback jersey, one every two years on the average. So we're finally are seeing some inkling of progress and you want to "blow it all up again?" Those who don't remember the past are doomed to repeat it. Sean McVays don't grow on trees, and you have to be damn lucky to guess right on an up and comer. Ask the Broncos how Josh McDaniels worked out. Williams just might be one of the coaches who works out the second time around. Belichick and Carroll sure did. 

    If you're interested, you'll have to go back to 1947 to find ten coaches the Steelers have had since. 

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by Clevfan4life
    #25

    because of kitchens we went from 24th to 13th in total offense. On defense we went from 14th to 30th. It's clear who we absolutely must retain and who can walk if we have better candidates

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #26

    how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

  • how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #27

    @clevfan4life said:

    how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

    But we won more. I think the Texans game skewed the numbers some. And another example where you can’t get the whole story on a stat line

  • @clevfan4life said:

    how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

    But we won more. I think the Texans game skewed the numbers some. And another example where you can’t get the whole story on a stat line

    C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #28

    @flyingfooldoug said:

    But we won more. I think the Texans game skewed the numbers some. And another example where you can’t get the whole story on a stat line

    well yeah, we won more cause we went from 24th to 13th in offense in essentially not a complete season because until Hue and Haley were fired, even with Baker the offense was so so. If that offense we saw the last 6 or so games had been there from the start, or at least from a 2-3 games in...we'd be in the playoffs. 

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #29

    if you guys are ok with the 30th ranked defense in the league going into next year when it's very conceivable we can step on the entire AFC north's neck....

  • @flyingfooldoug said:

    But we won more. I think the Texans game skewed the numbers some. And another example where you can’t get the whole story on a stat line

    well yeah, we won more cause we went from 24th to 13th in offense in essentially not a complete season because until Hue and Haley were fired, even with Baker the offense was so so. If that offense we saw the last 6 or so games had been there from the start, or at least from a 2-3 games in...we'd be in the playoffs. 

    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #30

    @clevfan4life said:

    well yeah, we won more cause we went from 24th to 13th in offense in essentially not a complete season because until Hue and Haley were fired, even with Baker the offense was so so. If that offense we saw the last 6 or so games had been there from the start, or at least from a 2-3 games in...we'd be in the playoffs. 

    One thing on the D. We didn’t give up a ton of points. Injuries in the secondary didn’t help either. I figure a little more, better talent will do wonders next year. Blake was the one calling D plays after the hue flu too

  • if you guys are ok with the 30th ranked defense in the league going into next year when it's very conceivable we can step on the entire AFC north's neck....

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by hoorta
    #31

    @clevfan4life said:

    if you guys are ok with the 30th ranked defense in the league going into next year when it's very conceivable we can step on the entire AFC north's neck....

    I don't think anyone is happy being ranked 30th in defense. LOL, guess who's 31st? The Chiefs. 🙂 

    For the record, the other playoff teams are:  Eagles #23, Patriots #21, Rams #19, Seahawks #16, Saints #14, Texans #12, Colts #11, Chargers #9, Cowboys #7, Bears #3, Ravens #1.  PS the Jaguars were 5th in total defense, and sucked because their quarterback situation sucked.

    I don't think anyone has the Ravens or Bears as odds on favorites to win the Super Bowl, even with their great defenses. Sure, we have to improve the defense, especially the run defense. It won't take much incremental improvement to drastically improve in that respect though. FWIW the difference between the Browns defense and the Rams is 35 yards\game, and the Rams only gave up 8 fewer points than the Browns over an entire season- less than one per game. Plus that yardage might be skewed because Cleveland played in four overtime games, some which went the full 10 minutes.  

  • @clevfan4life said:

    well yeah, we won more cause we went from 24th to 13th in offense in essentially not a complete season because until Hue and Haley were fired, even with Baker the offense was so so. If that offense we saw the last 6 or so games had been there from the start, or at least from a 2-3 games in...we'd be in the playoffs. 

    One thing on the D. We didn’t give up a ton of points. Injuries in the secondary didn’t help either. I figure a little more, better talent will do wonders next year. Blake was the one calling D plays after the hue flu too

    C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #32

    @flyingfooldoug said:

    One thing on the D. We didn’t give up a ton of points. Injuries in the secondary didn’t help either. I figure a little more, better talent will do wonders next year. Blake was the one calling D plays after the hue flu too

    talent wise im happy with that entire D except for two positions, interior DL and LDE. 

  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #33

    NFL Team Rushing Defense Statistics - 2018

     
    Statistics: Total | Downs | Passing | Rushing | Receiving | Returning | Kicking | Punting | Defense | Give/Take
    Season: Select One2018 Regular Season2017 Regular Season2016 Regular Season2015 Regular Season2014 Regular Season2013 Regular Season2012 Regular Season2011 Regular Season2010 Regular Season2009 Regular Season2008 Regular Season2007 Regular Season2006 Regular Season2005 Regular Season2004 Regular Season2003 Regular Season2002 Regular Season
    League: NFCAFCNFL
    Offense | Defense

    Rushing Yards Leaders

    RK TEAM ATT YDS YDS/A LONG TD YDS/G FUM FUML
    1 Chicago 339 1280 3.8 32 5 80.0 5 4
    2 New Orleans 356 1283 3.6 28 12 80.2 4 2
    3 Houston 385 1323 3.4 39 8 82.7 6 4
    4 Baltimore 354 1327 3.7 35 11 82.9 2 1
    5 Dallas 400 1513 3.8 68 12 94.6 7 4
    6 Pittsburgh 369 1538 4.2 51 13 96.1 5 1
    7 Philadelphia 332 1551 4.7 90 14 96.9 6 1
    8 Indianapolis 415 1626 3.9 34 12 101.6 5 2
    9 LA Chargers 395 1693 4.3 43 11 105.8 6 2
    10 Detroit 403 1
  • C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #34

    apparently playoff teams stop the run. 

  • how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #35

    @clevfan4life said:

    how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

    Duh.....because they went from  -0- wins to 7?   Also.....you are looking at the wrong stat.

    How do they compare from 2017 to 2018 in points given up per game?

  • @clevfan4life said:

    how more people aren't miffed about dropping 16 spots on the total team defense is beyond me. 

    Duh.....because they went from  -0- wins to 7?   Also.....you are looking at the wrong stat.

    How do they compare from 2017 to 2018 in points given up per game?

    C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
    #36

    @the-gipper said:

    Duh.....because they went from  -0- wins to 7?   Also.....you are looking at the wrong stat.

    How do they compare from 2017 to 2018 in points given up per game?

    product of being on the field less. Offense scoring points forces the opposing offenses to change game plans. That being said I "FULLY" acknowledge that this defense came up huge at certain crucial points in the season. The talent is there to be a top 5 defense. It's the scheme that I started to take issue with about midway through the season. I started to see shit that made no sense. But we were winning, so what right? Well we could have been in the playoffs if that defense was more settled "imo". I just wonder if firing Hue made WIlliams lose a little contact with the defense. Maybe another interim HC should have come in? I dunno. But that defense is why we're not playing next Sunday. 

  • if you guys are ok with the 30th ranked defense in the league going into next year when it's very conceivable we can step on the entire AFC north's neck....

    OrionO Orion wrote on last edited by Orion
    #37

    @clevfan4life said:

    if you guys are ok with the 30th ranked defense in the league 

    We moved up a spot eh?  We were ranked 31st most of the time that I was lookin'.

    Apparently, Dorsey interviewed Williams yesterday.  He got that out-of-the-way.  And I guess Kitchens will get an interview too.

    Although I too liked what these two guys did for our team when H&H were shown the door, I feel that we've seen the last of them on our home sidelines.  (and I've said pretty much that since Hue was fired)

    Dorsey will hire a new HC.  This new HC will hire his coordinators.  (that's just how these things are 'supposed to' work)  This new HC will not know Kitchens from a bath room  🙂.   (tongue in cheek.  he will know what happened to the Browns over this past year)

    Now, Dorsey may tell this new HC that he should probably interview Kitchens...and explain what a great job he did with Haley's offense, Baker, and the rest of the offensive players....but ultimately the new HC will hire who he wants.

  • @clevfan4life said:

    if you guys are ok with the 30th ranked defense in the league 

    We moved up a spot eh?  We were ranked 31st most of the time that I was lookin'.

    Apparently, Dorsey interviewed Williams yesterday.  He got that out-of-the-way.  And I guess Kitchens will get an interview too.

    Although I too liked what these two guys did for our team when H&H were shown the door, I feel that we've seen the last of them on our home sidelines.  (and I've said pretty much that since Hue was fired)

    Dorsey will hire a new HC.  This new HC will hire his coordinators.  (that's just how these things are 'supposed to' work)  This new HC will not know Kitchens from a bath room  🙂.   (tongue in cheek.  he will know what happened to the Browns over this past year)

    Now, Dorsey may tell this new HC that he should probably interview Kitchens...and explain what a great job he did with Haley's offense, Baker, and the rest of the offensive players....but ultimately the new HC will hire who he wants.

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by
    #38

    @orion said:

    Apparently, Dorsey interviewed Williams yesterday.  He got that out-of-the-way.  And I guess Kitchens will get an interview too.

    Although I too liked what these two guys did for our team when H&H were shown the door, I feel that we've seen the last of them on our home sidelines.  (and I've said pretty much that since Hue was fired)

    Dorsey will hire a new HC.  This new HC will hire his coordinators.  (that's just how these things are 'supposed to' work)  This new HC will not know Kitchens from a bath room  🙂.   (tongue in cheek.  he will know what happened to the Browns over this past year)

    Now, Dorsey may tell this new HC that he should probably interview Kitchens...and explain what a great job he did with Haley's offense, Baker, and the rest of the offensive players....but ultimately the new HC will hire who he wants.

    Not so certain we've seen the last of Williams- and certainly not Kitchens. But it was telling when they played a sound byte of Dorsey tonight on Red Zone on what he was looking for in a head coach. First thing out of his mouth was "high character guy". Could well be the foot dragging on Williams is Dorsey doesn't view him as such.