Giving Lerner some credit
-
I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME.
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal.
The whole point of the thread is that several of us, at different times, have criticized Lerner based on bad information. As new information came out in each situation, Lerner looked better and our criticism looked misplaced. Your post on Shanahan is a perfect example of this. Do you disagree?
As for Pioli/Shanahan v. Mankok, I absolutely CAN dispute your claim that the former is better. First of all, we have almost no idea how much of Pioli's success is his and how much is Belichek's. Second, Pioli's drafts have been very inconsistent - there's another thread discussing it elsewhere. Suffice to say, he misses as frequently as anyone else. Take away his 7th round QBs and he has a mediocre record. As for Shanahan, the guy's defense is horrid. Always. And he was fired because he refused to give up the reigns of the defense. You cant have an AFC North team with a shitty defense. It doesnt work. And is record is not as untouchable as it has been treated. He misses the playoffs more often than not, and loses in the first round the majority of the time that he makes the playoffs. I'm not saying he's a bad coach, but it isnt clear that he wouldve been a better fit than Mangini.
Oh yeah, and Lerner did contact Shanahan AND interview Pioli before hiring Mankok, so it wasnt a lack of consideration or insight. It was a purposeful and informed decision.
...As for Pioli/Shanahan v. Mankok, I ab...
Awesome, awesome nickname, Toop.
Ok, so I'm twelve years old.
-
Masters said:
Last I checked, KC didn't hire Shanahan yet. So we are busting Lerner's balls for not getting a guy no one has gotten yet?I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME.
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal.
Do I like the hiring of Mangini? Ya, I think he can work out and I wasnt disappointed when he was hired. He has the critera I wanted. EXPERENICE. But I also want what is the best out there. Am I wrong for that? Na, I dont think so.
Nor am I busting Lerner's balls. I havent once called for him to sell the team as I know others have. But I'm not ready to say all of a sudden he knows what he is doing, maybe he has learned a thing or two, or hired someone that knows a thing or two about football but as I said, I'll take a wait and see approach.
I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME.
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal.
Do I like the hiring of Mangini? Ya, I think he can work out and I wasnt disappointed when he was hired. He has the critera I wanted. EXPERENICE. But I also want what is the best out there. Am I wrong for that? Na, I dont think so.
Nor am I busting Lerner's balls. I havent once called for him to sell the team as I know others have. But I'm not ready to say all of a sudden he knows what he is doing, maybe he has learned a thing or two, or hired someone that knows a thing or two about football but as I said, I'll take a wait and see approach.
Sure I can. It isn't fact. It's opinion. It requires leaping to the assumption that Pioli wasn't BB's lacking and that the two guys can work well together.
I like the hiring of Mangini. At the time of his hiring, he was the most experienced HCing canidate and he wasn't a bad HC with the Jets, and they were foolish to fire him.
Of course you are busting his balls. You complaining about who he didn't get and leaping to the assumption that those he didn't get will end up better.
-
I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME.
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal.
Do I like the hiring of Mangini? Ya, I think he can work out and I wasnt disappointed when he was hired. He has the critera I wanted. EXPERENICE. But I also want what is the best out there. Am I wrong for that? Na, I dont think so.
Nor am I busting Lerner's balls. I havent once called for him to sell the team as I know others have. But I'm not ready to say all of a sudden he knows what he is doing, maybe he has learned a thing or two, or hired someone that knows a thing or two about football but as I said, I'll take a wait and see approach.
Sure I can. It isn't fact. It's opinion. It requires leaping to the assumption that Pioli wasn't BB's lacking and that the two guys can work well together.
I like the hiring of Mangini. At the time of his hiring, he was the most experienced HCing canidate and he wasn't a bad HC with the Jets, and they were foolish to fire him.
Of course you are busting his balls. You complaining about who he didn't get and leaping to the assumption that those he didn't get will end up better.
Masters said:
Sure I can. It isn't fact. It's opinion. It requires leaping to the assumption that Pioli wasn't BB's lacking and that the two guys can work well together.I like the hiring of Mangini. At the time of his hiring, he was the most experienced HCing canidate and he wasn't a bad HC with the Jets, and they were foolish to fire him.
Of course you are busting his balls. You complaining about who he didn't get and leaping to the assumption that those he didn't get will end up better.
I disagree, and I guess it is opinion but its based on the fact that Shanahan is a superbowl winning coach and Mangini up to this point is a sub .500 head coach. On paper Shanahan is better, to me you cant dispute that but everybody views things differently I guess.
Pioli was the hottest prospect GM and before we knew we wasnt going to get him everybody on this board wanted him and thought he was the best out there. Now that we decided not to hire him, Kokinis a guy nobody was talking about is suppose to be better? Why, because that is who we ended up with? On paper to me, Pioli was the guy everybody wanted.
We are talking on paper here because thats all we have to base anything on. Now in a few years, Mangini and Kokinis may end up better, for the browns sake lets hope so, but at this point I dont believe you can say they are better.
I am questioning Lerner yes, but I think past history has to make you question him, but I'm not calling for the guy to sell the team. I just want him to put a winner together.
-
Masters said:
Last I checked, KC didn't hire Shanahan yet. So we are busting Lerner's balls for not getting a guy no one has gotten yet?I swear you people are lousy at reading what someone wrote. At the time I wrote the post ESPN made it sound like it was almost a done deal, obviously it wasnt. I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME.
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it. Now if that team doesnt happen, fine but at the time I wrote the post that was made to sound almost a done deal.
Do I like the hiring of Mangini? Ya, I think he can work out and I wasnt disappointed when he was hired. He has the critera I wanted. EXPERENICE. But I also want what is the best out there. Am I wrong for that? Na, I dont think so.
Nor am I busting Lerner's balls. I havent once called for him to sell the team as I know others have. But I'm not ready to say all of a sudden he knows what he is doing, maybe he has learned a thing or two, or hired someone that knows a thing or two about football but as I said, I'll take a wait and see approach.
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it.
i dispute it. It's not a fact. You can't say "on paper" and then proclaim that it is a fact. That makes no sense.
Your basis is a theory. Nothing more.
-
Im strickly saying on paper Pioli and Shanahan is better then Mangini and Kokinis. That is a fact, you can not dispute it.
i dispute it. It's not a fact. You can't say "on paper" and then proclaim that it is a fact. That makes no sense.
Your basis is a theory. Nothing more.
-
Here's what I like. The Browns have plenty of company in the we-fired-our coach boat. From everything I can tell, Lerner has been the most aggressive and has the most to show for his work. He's interviewed and considered multiple candidates for each position. Because this due diligence was very active, he still has the Browns ahead in the race compared to other teams in our situation.
None of the new HC's have the chance to get wins this time of year, so all even on that point as sure, wins in the end is all that matters.
I still say Quinn's success or failure will make Mangini, Kokinis, and Lerner either look like heros or goats. If Quinn fails, we'll all question if we should have gone after any of these candidates if they have more wins.
If it all works out, here's how it'll go:
The O-line plays well (no more allowing LB's straight up the gut at our QB), then
Quinn will have the time to make good decisions and drive the ball, then
The Browns will win, then
Mangini will look like the correct choice, then
We'll all say Lerner did a bang up job.
I still say Quinn's success or failure will make Mangini, Kokinis, and Lerner either look like heros or goats. If Quinn fails, we'll all question if we should have gone after any of these candidates if they have more wins.
Wow. i don't give a shit whether Quinn succeeds or even plays another down. It is important to me that Mangini succeed. i'm beginning to see Lum's viewpoint.
-
I think you're missing my point. It has nothing to do with Quinn per say, but has everything to do with the QB. If the QB plays well, then the HC looks good, and the front office will look good too. I don't care how talented the GM or HC is, if the QB isn't out there turning the ball over, then that's that.
Example:
Carmen Policy at the 49'ers with Joe Montana and he was brilliant. Executive of the year, etc., etc.
Carmen Policy at the Browns with a handful of lousy QB's and he had no success.
I realize the QB can't do it alone, which is why I pointed to O-line play. I also don't care who QB's the Browns, as long as they win, or are at least competitive. Since DA was the worst ranked starting offensive player for the Browns last year, he's done.
So really? You're starting to see Lum's point of view? The QB needs to play well or everyone else looks bad. If DA wouldn't have thrown 5 pics against the Bengals in '07 or played at least half as well in most games as he did against the Giants on MNF in '08, Quinn would still be on the pine, which would have been fine.
(I will admit I never thought DA had the stuff. I still don't.)
-
i'm more confused. So if Mangini wins, but doesn't have a successful QB by NFL (or this Board's) standards, then he is a failure? Please explain.
-
Ill take him over Ralph Wilson or Al Davis any day. He may, in the end, prove himself inept, but at least he's been trying and is fairly free of meddling.
-
Ill take him over Ralph Wilson or Al Davis any day. He may, in the end, prove himself inept, but at least he's been trying and is fairly free of meddling.
Ill take him over Ralph Wilson or Al Davis any day. He may, in the end, prove himself inept, but at least he's been trying and is fairly free of meddling.
This thread is becomming more bizarre. You're painting Al Davis and Ralph Wilson with the same brush? Where did that come from?
-
i'm more confused. So if Mangini wins, but doesn't have a successful QB by NFL (or this Board's) standards, then he is a failure? Please explain.
i'm more confused. So if Mangini wins, but doesn't have a successful QB by NFL (or this Board's) standards, then he is a failure? Please explain.
Oh, I get where we're not connecting. I think the QB play determines the success of a team more than any other factor. I guess you can have a winner with poor QB play, but it is less likely. If Quinn is below average or flops and is replaced, but the Browns are winning, I'll take it for sure. I just don't think its likely for Quinn to fail AND the Browns to succeed in '09. They'll at least give Quinn 8 games I'd imagine, and if he fails, then '09 will be a repeat of '08 I fear.
-
i'm more confused. So if Mangini wins, but doesn't have a successful QB by NFL (or this Board's) standards, then he is a failure? Please explain.
Oh, I get where we're not connecting. I think the QB play determines the success of a team more than any other factor. I guess you can have a winner with poor QB play, but it is less likely. If Quinn is below average or flops and is replaced, but the Browns are winning, I'll take it for sure. I just don't think its likely for Quinn to fail AND the Browns to succeed in '09. They'll at least give Quinn 8 games I'd imagine, and if he fails, then '09 will be a repeat of '08 I fear.
If Quinn is below average or flops and is replaced, but the Browns are winning, I'll take it for sure. I just don't think its likely for Quinn to fail AND the Browns to succeed in '09. They'll at least give Quinn 8 games I'd imagine, and if he fails, then '09 will be a repeat of '08 I fear.
Now i'm with ya. If we go into the season with DA at the helm out of necessity, i don't think most on this Board are as mature as you are about that. You are a true Browns fan. Are you coming to a tailgate?
-
If Quinn is below average or flops and is replaced, but the Browns are winning, I'll take it for sure. I just don't think its likely for Quinn to fail AND the Browns to succeed in '09. They'll at least give Quinn 8 games I'd imagine, and if he fails, then '09 will be a repeat of '08 I fear.
Now i'm with ya. If we go into the season with DA at the helm out of necessity, i don't think most on this Board are as mature as you are about that. You are a true Browns fan. Are you coming to a tailgate?
-
I have to throw this out there regarding Shanahan & Pioli & the FACTS as stated....here are a couple FACTS:
1) Pioli is UNPROVEN at the GM level.
2) In the last THREE years (which is what Mangini is judged on), Shanahan has a "500" record, 24W & 24L, with NO playoff appearances, & he had HOW many years, post Elway, to rebuild his program?
The above 2 items ARE facts, & recent history doesn't tell me that that pairing would have been our best bet. Given almost even records & 1 playoff appearance by Mangini, I would go with the younger guy every time. I preferred Mangini over Shanahan from the start, but that's just my preference. We'll see what happens down the road, but Shanahan would certainly NOT have been a guaranteed step up.
Mike
-
They throw a great tailgate. I wish I could have made the ones they did. Or they did when I could.
Roach is a good guy......
-
Amen CM. 100% agree.
Piloi has Bellicheck and Brady. Who knows how he'll pan out. Not bummed at all.
Shannahan had Elway (although I will give him credit for turing no-names into high yardage RB's, but this is cancelled by his decision to take the entire Browns D-line after a pretty awful defensive year).
-
They throw a great tailgate. I wish I could have made the ones they did. Or they did when I could.
Roach is a good guy......
-
Dungy is definitely a Christian, and a vocal one. Imagine how excited Indy must be to be free from that freak!
-
Ill take him over Ralph Wilson or Al Davis any day. He may, in the end, prove himself inept, but at least he's been trying and is fairly free of meddling.
This thread is becomming more bizarre. You're painting Al Davis and Ralph Wilson with the same brush? Where did that come from?
This thread is becomming more bizarre. You're painting Al Davis and Ralph Wilson with the same brush? Where did that come from?
Not painting them with the same brush: Ralph Wilson is cheap and does little by way of trying to make the team better lately. Al Davis micromanages and does more meddling than almost any owner in pro sports. Lerner, to date, is guilty of neither. Not sure how that makes the thread bizarre - just pointing out a couple of possible strenths in a thread that was originally about cutting the owner some slack and giving him credit where its due.
-
Masters said:
Sure I can. It isn't fact. It's opinion. It requires leaping to the assumption that Pioli wasn't BB's lacking and that the two guys can work well together.I like the hiring of Mangini. At the time of his hiring, he was the most experienced HCing canidate and he wasn't a bad HC with the Jets, and they were foolish to fire him.
Of course you are busting his balls. You complaining about who he didn't get and leaping to the assumption that those he didn't get will end up better.
I disagree, and I guess it is opinion but its based on the fact that Shanahan is a superbowl winning coach and Mangini up to this point is a sub .500 head coach. On paper Shanahan is better, to me you cant dispute that but everybody views things differently I guess.
Pioli was the hottest prospect GM and before we knew we wasnt going to get him everybody on this board wanted him and thought he was the best out there. Now that we decided not to hire him, Kokinis a guy nobody was talking about is suppose to be better? Why, because that is who we ended up with? On paper to me, Pioli was the guy everybody wanted.
We are talking on paper here because thats all we have to base anything on. Now in a few years, Mangini and Kokinis may end up better, for the browns sake lets hope so, but at this point I dont believe you can say they are better.
I am questioning Lerner yes, but I think past history has to make you question him, but I'm not calling for the guy to sell the team. I just want him to put a winner together.
I disagree, and I guess it is opinion but its based on the fact that Shanahan is a superbowl winning coach and Mangini up to this point is a sub .500 head coach. On paper Shanahan is better, to me you cant dispute that but everybody views things differently I guess.
Pioli was the hottest prospect GM and before we knew we wasnt going to get him everybody on this board wanted him and thought he was the best out there. Now that we decided not to hire him, Kokinis a guy nobody was talking about is suppose to be better? Why, because that is who we ended up with? On paper to me, Pioli was the guy everybody wanted.
We are talking on paper here because thats all we have to base anything on. Now in a few years, Mangini and Kokinis may end up better, for the browns sake lets hope so, but at this point I dont believe you can say they are better.
I am questioning Lerner yes, but I think past history has to make you question him, but I'm not calling for the guy to sell the team. I just want him to put a winner together.
Fair on Shanahan for winning SBs. But what has he done since John Elway retired? Mangini had two winning seasons in his first 3 as a HC. For me it's hard to say who of the two is really the better HC. Shanahan hasn't done anything anything in 10 years and playes in the AFC west, which has been a weak division for 10+ years.
Accorsi has been pitching Kokinis for two years now, and recommended him over Dimitroff, who turned ATL around (and Accorsi recommended him as well). Pioli has been the pretty girl at the dance for 5 years now, but just now finally decided to leave. I wasn't opposed to him by any means. But he's a crap shoot as much as Kokinis is.
To me, both combo's are equal crap shoots. You have Pioli/Shanahan on paper, which is one guy in BB shadow (and that hasn't worked out too well for guys who were with him in major roles for a long time), and a coach who hasn't done anything since John Elway was his QB.
Then you have Kokinis who has been in Ozzie's shadow (that didn't work out too well last time CLE went that route), and a coach who had 2 winning seasons in his first 3 years as a HC, in the spotlight of NYC.
So to me, I see equal risk, at best.
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