My personal opinion is that Mangini was kept on because he earned it but that Holmgren had no intent on keeping him. This is clearly a better team than last year and perhaps a different OC might help. My feeling is that Holmgren is keeping quiet to just let it play out. The fact that he's not rushed to Mangini's defense is telling but who knows what votes of confidence mean anymore?

No one on the coaching staff is going to make excuses but there are certainly reasons for the slide we've seen after the Jets' game. That's all great and good but it's not going to sway Holmgren. I thought that with the potential of a lockout and a low odds chance of really winning this season...he kept Mangini on. He might have kept him as a built-in scapegoat to fall back on. The shame of it all is that the team is better and the coaching staff has shown (at times) the brilliance of being able to match up with the best in the league. It's just maddening (and I don't mean John Maddem although his voice does drive me nuts).

Time will tell but they have all been "must wins" at this point.

Just out of curiosity, who was the last coach or GM of the Browns that the PD writers LIKED?

@bodogjoe said:

BUT..does he know the guy who knows the guy who know the guy who REALLY KNOWS the guy.

GOOD GRIEF!

@choco said:

No doubt.

@bodogjoe said:

More solid than over half the BS rumors that surround the NFL.

@bodogjoe said:

Sounds like it.

I don't think Holmgren has handled this very well.....but i do understand the point about when they stick up for you it is almost the kiss of death.

If Mangini is let go, I won't be thrilled, nor will I jump off a cliff, but if Holmgren then takes the job rather than hire someone else, I'll think him a self serving ass.

It is pretty easy to see the team is pretty close.

Nobody really expected more than 8 wins at best, so for Holmgren to fire Mangini then step in tells me he just kept Mangini for this transition season for his own purposes.

Put it this way....Holmgren wouldn't step in to a crappy situation....he'd let someone else take the losses.

@shepwrite said:

Uh, right. You can't even talk yourself into that. Now go look up "pedantic."

Imagine that....over complicating a simple assertion. I'm sooooo surprised.

For being above shit slinging, ur sure quick to throw around intelligence smack. Just keep throwing out all ur golden nuggets of projections.....we always need to laugh in the offseason.

@gafreleets said:

Could you possibly be more hypocritical?! How is that any different than you whining about how Tom Brady and the patriots winning super bowls because "they cheated?" Fans from all teams agree that the Super Bowl (Steelers/Seahawks) had some poor officiating. I have yet to hear anyone blame spygate for all of the Patriots Super Bowls...

I am not gonna sit here and say the zebras handed you a Super Bowl, but plenty of others believe it to be true, and yet no one but you seems to discredit the Patriots Super Bowls this past decade...

So accuse Holmgren all you want, but he is just stating what the vast majority of football fans feel to be true...

@brownsbacker said:

Holmgren, obviously. What a snake.

You're right in your points.

The thing that bugs me the most about Holmgren is:

-When the media addresses him as "Coach", WHY doesn't he correct them...he is NOT the Coach, Eric Mangini is!

Mike

********************

Mike,

I think that Holmgren was a coach so long, it's just a tag that he enjoys. He has said before, that he isn't the coach.

But the nickname "coach" is well-deserved, and Mangini says he loves having Holmgren to discuss things with.

If some dumb knothead refers to him as the head coach, watch him correct them quickly, and call them a knothead.

Mike

@roach said:

And just who exactly fed you this unproven conspiracy theory?

@choco said:

I'm trying to figure a way that made any sense. It's your assertion that I'm alarmingly pedantic?

Uh, right. You can't even talk yourself into that. Now go look up "pedantic."

@neweradawg said:

Understatement of the year.

@neweradawg said:

Line of the day. Very Ricky Gervais. I'm gonna make a poster that wedges that in, just barely, within the limitations of the page: THINK INSIDE THE BOX.

In a weird way, it's brilliant. So much of fandom is about ear-fucquing ourselves into thinking stuff that's clearly not real. Sometimes you need to pull your brain back inside "the box," meaning reality.

Thinking inside the box is the new thinking outside the box. And thinking THAT is thinking outside the box. And I just made myself spontaneously high.

That said, I think he knows NFL defenses and he learned a thing or two about team culture from Belicheck, another difficult to really like guy. He has some smarts and some skills. I don't hate him. I actually have found him pretty funny in a really dry way this year. I do hate the way he sees and handles quarterbacks, period, but that's true of a lot of defensive-leaning coaches. He needs to walk away from any and all meetings that have anything to do with the offense... and I'm not sure that makes for a great coach. Cowher pulled it off, though.

The fact is that 90 percent of Planet Earth didn't expect him to be the coach this year... and it didn't make a ton of sense. When a guy like Holmgren takes over a franchise, logic dictates that he sink or swim with his own systems and his own people. For whatever reason (and some say it was Gruden's unavailability) he didn't do it from jump street. He's still itching to do everything HIS way... and I get that.

But I'm not sure I understand people turning on Holmgren. Let's see what shape he leaves us in when he's done.

@calfoxwc said:

Holmgren could have denied, explained, laughed it off, affirmed that Mangini was definately going to stay,

and it wouldn't have changed anything in the negative/sensational scoop press. After all, Holmgren said in the beginning

that he would review things at the end of the season. Why should he change all that, because some sports writers want to be

controversial. The Browns are fine, headed in an excellent direction. The only reason for Mangini to go, is because of something

behind the scenes. The sensationalism isn't necessary. This team has not been thumped one time this season. That's a huge, huge

improvement folks. Another draft, things will be more dramatic for the good. This time of year, sportswriters/etc run out of things to say,

and, the silly season starts.

Mike,

You're right in your points.

The thing that bugs me the most about Holmgren is:

-When the media addresses him as "Coach", WHY doesn't he correct them...he is NOT the Coach, Eric Mangini is!

Mike

@roach said:

There is only one explanation for these sources to get involved and stick their necks out- Holmgren's office is leaking this stuff. i think it is a chicken shit way for him to approach the matter. i thought he was more of a straight up guy than that.

I'll call my cousin, writer for the PD, and tell them to stop.

Holmgren could have denied, explained, laughed it off, affirmed that Mangini was definately going to stay,

and it wouldn't have changed anything in the negative/sensational scoop press. After all, Holmgren said in the beginning

that he would review things at the end of the season. Why should he change all that, because some sports writers want to be

controversial. The Browns are fine, headed in an excellent direction. The only reason for Mangini to go, is because of something

behind the scenes. The sensationalism isn't necessary. This team has not been thumped one time this season. That's a huge, huge

improvement folks. Another draft, things will be more dramatic for the good. This time of year, sportswriters/etc run out of things to say,

and, the silly season starts.

@roach said:

There is only one explanation for these sources to get involved and stick their necks out- Holmgren's office is leaking this stuff. i think it is a chicken shit way for him to approach the matter. i thought he was more of a straight up guy than that.

I just don't understand how this whole kill Mangini atmosphere is Holmgren fault. He sure as shit isn't leaking anything, the media is just going off of what he said at mid season which is he will evaluate the coaches at the end of the season and make a decision on what to do with the coaching staff then. I sure as hell don't see any writters saying "un-named source from the Browns office" all I hear is "Holmgren said at midseason" and "according to NFL.com". And seriously it is inevitable that people are going to eventually turn against Holmgren anyway. It is going to be the same people who have already turned against Mangini, it's going to be the same people who are going to turn on any new coach, they will also be the ones turning against Heckert when he has his first bad draft.

I personally think Mangini is doing a good job and Holgren and Heckert have done a good job besides some bad mid season trades (DE Mitchel who hasn't seen the field yet and Bell [who has actually been doing better lately and Harrison wasn't going to resign with us at the end of the season regardless]).