Coach Chud Fired

Spectralcow

Well, that's no way to talk to each other. Disagreeing is fine. Name-calling rants are just silly.

The Chud thing is tough. I've mentioned a number of times that I think the FO did Chud dirty, and I've mentioned why I think that. What I suppose I don't really get is where all of this support for Chud is coming from (i.e. what it is based on, what fuels it, etc.). The fact that the FO treated him badly neither means he was a good coach, nor does it mean that he was going to be a good coach. I'm not saying that he wasn't, I'm saying that I didn't really see anything that indicated to me that he definitely was (the fact that the players liked him doesn't really tell me that; I've seen bad coaches that players liked and good coaches that players didn't really like).

Will the team be better as a result of the 2014 draft? I sure as hell hope so. But that's got a lot more to do with acquiring better players than it does with coaching. It's only logical that the same coach should be able to do better with better players. That should be an expectation, not a goal or credit to the coach. I've said it before and I'll say it again: A "good coach" should be able to do better than a "bad coach" with the same players.

Personally, I don't think that Chud should have been hired in the first place. I don't think he's the kind or quality of coach the Browns need to turn things around. There seems to be a fundamental disagreement (on these boards and in general) between folks on what's expected of a coach in their first year. To me, it isn't unreasonable to expect to see how the new coach is better for the team. A lot of you don't believe this has to be visible right away. I don't think we're going to come to an agreement on that. One stance seems to be: "Chud didn't do enough wrong to be fired." One stance seems to be: "Chud didn't really do enough right to be kept."

One last thing before I click "post". Let's put the "Chud" thing aside for a second and speak in generalities. Some people seem to believe that consistency is preferable to inconsistency. I would argue that this is only true for those situations which are constructively consistent. Situations which are either consistent in their decline or holding a consistently low level aren't really that great. So is consistency preferable to change? Sometimes, but not if the status quo is negative. If things are consistently dysfunctional, change is the better option.

calfoxwc

The Chudzinski Conspiracy Theory makes way too much sense.

They knew they were going to fire Chud before the Steeler game?

Firing Chud makes no sense, unless the Browns were afraid they

couldn't fire him after he started winning next year with Hoyer and

a big name qb and several other players in the draft.

It isn't like the Browns were losing by large margins, say, 35 - 3.

Haslam, Banner and Lombardi are more like the Three Potato Heads than

the Stooges. Honestly, I believe they knew from day one that Chud was

a one year fill in.

Spectralcow

Calf,

I'm not saying there wasn't an anti-Chud conspiracy, but I do have a contention with one thing you said. In my mind (and IN GENERAL), a team loses games by a lot when they are drastically outmatched in talent; they lose a number of games by very slim margins when they are out-coached.

Tim Couch Pulls Out

@spectralcow said:

Calf,

I'm not saying there wasn't an anti-Chud conspiracy, but I do have a contention with one thing you said. In my mind (and IN GENERAL), a team loses games by a lot when they are drastically outmatched in talent; they lose a number of games by very slim margins when they are out-coached.

Not necessarily the case, but a good general rule of thumb. Mangini beat the Saints by 13 and Patriots by 20 with a team that had far less talent than their opponents. Could be the exception that proves the rule, however.

My feeling is that Chud was set up for failure and didn't do enough to win. He was saddled with three bad quarterbacks and the only one that showed any signs of being good got injured. His runningback was traded and was replaced by a stable of nobodies. The offense was barely addressed in the draft, with only one player being added, a late round offensive lineman. He was hardly put in a position to succeed.

However, he made questionable coaching and time management decisions, which is to be expected for a first year head coach. There was a regression in performance as the season progressed, of course. The team failed to win more games than the previous year, which normally leads to coaching changes. Chud went against the wishes of the FO on at least two separate occasions by starting Weeden and by not cutting Little.

So he also clearly put himself in a position to be fired.

You can argue either way, but the point is that he's gone.

If we go out and get a head coach that leads this team to the postseason for the next ten years, nobody will care about Chud. Personally, I think Chud can be a good head coach. He's a leader of men, as DQJ put it. He's a former player. He's passionate. He's an offensive guru. And he's young. He'll have a solid career, just not here.

Spectralcow

Couldn't have said it better myself. I agree almost whole-heartedly with what Calf just said. (Not sure I'm "all in" on the last paragraph, but up to that point, I'm 100%.)

D Bone

I don't know if I buy into 'they knew Chud was a 1 and done when the hired him', but I do believe the next head coach of the Cleveland Browns has already been picked and the backroom deal all but done. IMO, there was no way that the FO would make such a massive change without the answer already in place. These guys, while pretty bad, aren't THAT bad.................

Tour2ma

@spectralcow said:
Obviously, I agree with Hurricane that the Browns have serious QB problems. Here's my thing, though: If you know you don't have a viable option at QB, you don't insist on switching to a completely QB-dependent offense and then cry, "Well, you can't blame ME! I didn't have a QB!" when it doesn't work out.

Can you list a few offensive schemes that are less QB dependent for me?

Norv's Vertical was the offense that was supposedly tailor made for Wheezy's "talents"... at least that was the training camp line.

@erie-dawg said:
I'm starting to think (Spectralcow is) just fucking around.

You, too? Welcome to the club...

@hoorta said:
Go look up Weeden's pre season stats and tell me you wouldn't have started him- they were more than respectable.

Bingo...

@spectralcow said:

Well, that's no way to talk to each other. Disagreeing is fine. Name-calling rants are just silly.

The Chud thing is tough. I've mentioned a number of times that I think the FO did Chud dirty, and I've mentioned why I think that. What I suppose I don't really get is where all of this support for Chud is coming from (i.e. what it is based on, what fuels it, etc.).

There is not a side of any argument you have not taken since you chose to grace us with your wisdom.

We cuss and we fight on this site. Don't like it? Then fuck off... there's another Browns' site perfect for you...

Mark O

@tour2ma said:

There is not a side of any argument you have not taken since you chose to grace us with your wisdom.

We cuss and we fight on this site. Don't like it? Then fuck off... there's another Browns' site perfect for you...

Ain't that the truth...

Happy Fucking New Year..

miktoxic

@clevfan4life said:

but he ain't fuckin wrong, neither is Joe Thomas. These guys actually play the game d bag.

OMG!! CLEVFAN4LIFE CRYING AGAIN!!!!!

who gives a fuck what cutler or JT say. they make more money in one year that you'll see in your whole life, so shut the fuck up and play the game like a pro everytime you step on the field. for whatever schmo is standing on the sidelines. don't worry cutler will be playing golf with JT in a week or 2, so what's the prob?

JT should be ashamed along with the other players on this team for not playing hard every second of every game this year. they're the ones that cost chudzinski his job, not me or you. them. and the fact that the guy couldn't improve the team from a pat shumur team. talk about sad.

if i was haslam i would have fired the whole bunch including the FO.

Erie Dawg

So if it was known last year that Chad was one and done unless he made great strides this year with 1 receiver and a TE and nobody's in the backfield, and the coach they really wanted was going to be available this year and that said coach is supposedly Josh McDaniels?

Is that what the basic conclusion is?

Erie Dawg

Disagree Mik, everyone in the league is scratching their head at what happened. And like it was said even players that have or haven't played for him. I have only personally heard one person say it was a good idea and it was a anonymous player.

miktoxic

@erie-dawg said:
Disagree Mik, everyone in the league is scratching their head at what happened. And like it was said even players that have or haven't played for him. I have only personally heard one person say it was a good idea and it was a anonymous player.

i never said it was a good idea to fire him after one year. i've stated that many times.

it either comes down to 2 things. banner and lombardi wanted someone else from the start and settled for their 5th choice and he was a lame duck from the start

OR

haslam doesn't give a fuck and will only tolerate winning and nothing less.

we'll find out after next year if that is true or not because if we go for another 4-12 season and haslam and banner don't get canned then we we know chud's hiring was a sham.

with the talent (foundation) we had and the games we had in our pockets during 3 qtrs just to lose in the fourth was enough for me to justify firing chud the dud. i could care less what players say. sure wipe their ass after every drunken squirt and they'd love ya too. give me a coach that grabs them by the facemask and screams at them in the face.

yeah, that's the guy i want.

Tour2ma

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

http://factoryofsadness.sportsblog.com/posts/240229/the_chudzinski_conspiracy_theory.html

The Chudzinski conspiracy.

Entertaining write up, if nothing else... the George Clooney voice was an excellent suggestion.

It all hinges on McD coming our way. We shall see...

Reflecting further upon Haslam in the presser... I think I saw a lot of Jerry Jones in him. And that scares me...

Tour2ma

@mark-o said:

Ain't that the truth...

Happy Fucking New Year..

Back at ya.... Asshole-O...

DieHardBrownsFan

@clevfan4life said:

but he ain't fuckin wrong, neither is Joe Thomas. These guys actually play the game d bag.

Players should shut there traps. They get paid to play the game, period.

gftChris

If there's any player who has earned the right to talk about this organisation it's Joe Thomas, though. Can you blame him for being frustrated? 7 years a brown, 7 pro-bowls, if he retired tomorrow he'd probably be in the HOF in 5 years. Sure, he shouldn't run his mouth, if he wasn't a browns fan when he was drafted he is now, like Cribbs and Dawson and DQJ, and he just wants the team to win. I don't have much problem with it.

tml1138

@miktoxic said:

i never said it was a good idea to fire him after one year. i've stated that many times.

it either comes down to 2 things. banner and lombardi wanted someone else from the start and settled for their 5th choice and he was a lame duck from the start

OR

haslam doesn't give a fuck and will only tolerate winning and nothing less.

we'll find out after next year if that is true or not because if we go for another 4-12 season and haslam and banner don't get canned then we we know chud's hiring was a sham.

with the talent (foundation) we had and the games we had in our pockets during 3 qtrs just to lose in the fourth was enough for me to justify firing chud the dud. i could care less what players say. sure wipe their ass after every drunken squirt and they'd love ya too. give me a coach that grabs them by the facemask and screams at them in the face.

yeah, that's the guy i want.

I have to agree with this. Nice guys finish last. Mangini was the exception out of the last four coaches. Crennel, Shurmur, Chud...all too nice. The team needs a HC they will respect and play hard for, yet is a hard-ass and don't want to incur his wrath.

tml1138

@tour2ma said:

Entertaining write up, if nothing else... the George Clooney voice was an excellent suggestion.

It all hinges on McD coming our way. We shall see...

Reflecting further upon Haslam in the presser... I think I saw a lot of Jerry Jones in him. And that scares me...

We wished we had an owner that was more involved than Lerner. Now the old phrase "careful what you wish for" might have hit us square in the face. He wasn't involved as much as I thought he would be, but the company issues he's dealing with obviously have kept him busy. After that's run its course, we'll see what we really have in an owner.