Schottenheimer Fired

[swerb]

Per ESPN News.

Let the Marty to the Browns rumors and speculation begin.

Chud's already here to run his offense.

[swerb]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2763552

[jb]

Per ESPN News.

Let the Marty to the Browns rumors and speculation begin.

Chud's already here to run his offense.

Man, this is just downright bizarre!

Why the wait? Why did they reaffirm he was staying just after the season?

Hiring Marty would cure everything wrong with the franchise that needs to be cured. You could keep the 3 - 4 & Todd , he's used to working with Chudd.... would Phil have the balls? Would Lerner, the fan, the man who knows this franchise needs a shot in the ar, meddle?

[swerb]

I put the odds of this happening at about 20%, but I'd pull the rip cord here if I was Randy.

Admit you fucked up on Crennel. Nice guy, but it's just so god damn obvious the guy doesn't have it. I've seen all the empirical evidence I need to see on Romeo.

And the whole thing about not winning the big one. To me, it's like the people that blame John Hart for not winning one here. We had the big one. Joe Table gorked it away. Marty ... he's been there so many times. Be it Byner, Eric Parker, Keading, Marlon McCree ... there's been several cases where forces outside of his control were the difference.

Jesus H ... I'd do pushups on hot coals just to get to a big game at this stage. And does anyone out there actually believe Romeo Crennel has what it takes to win a sausage? Come on now ...

Three years of Marty before having him take over as team President. Go get a David Carr or a Damon Huard to go with CF and DA. Draft Peterson and Sears or Joe Thomas and Michael Bush. Go get FA's for the OL, DL, and CB.

And lets do this thing. Im sick of sucking. Romeo will be fired. Maybe 6 games into the season, maybe after the season, maybe after the '08 season. Why delay the inevitable?

Martys won 200 games in this league. Hes won here, knows this town. 14-2 last season. Has built OL's out of scrap heaps.

Theres a gleam men.

[consigliere]

Get it done.

Bring Marty home.

Maybe a return to Cleveland can help him (and us) exorcize his demons. This IS the shot in the arm this org needs.

[leadpipe]

I put the odds of this happening at about 20%, but I'd pull the rip cord here if I was Randy.

Admit you fucked up on Crennel. Nice guy, but it's just so god damn obvious the guy doesn't have it. I've seen all the empirical evidence I need to see on Romeo.

And the whole thing about not winning the big one. To me, it's like the people that blame John Hart for not winning one here. We had the big one. Joe Table gorked it away. Marty ... he's been there so many times. Be it Byner, Eric Parker, Keading, Marlon McCree ... there's been several cases where forces outside of his control were the difference.

Jesus H ... I'd do pushups on hot coals just to get to a big game at this stage. And does anyone out there actually believe Romeo Crennel has what it takes to win a sausage? Come on now ...

Three years of Marty before having him take over as team President. Go get a David Carr or a Damon Huard to go with CF and DA. Draft Peterson and Sears or Joe Thomas and Michael Bush. Go get FA's for the OL, DL, and CB.

And lets do this thing. Im sick of sucking. Romeo will be fired. Maybe 6 games into the season, maybe after the season, maybe after the '08 season. Why delay the inevitable?

Martys won 200 games in this league. Hes won here, knows this town. 14-2 last season. Has built OL's out of scrap heaps.

Theres a gleam men.

I agree with this. Except the Mesa part. I find it funny that he gets ripped for blowing a one run save and Charlie Nagy can blow a 5 run lead and nobody says a word about it. He does his job in game three and there is no game seven. All a matter of perspective I suppose.

Anyways. Even if Shottenheimer can't win the big one, one thing he can do is turn franchises that are in a bad way around. The Browns would obviously qualify here. A few things you WON'T see if he comes in

-Braylon Edwards popping off in the locker room, twice

-Disinterseted veterans hanging around for a check (McGinest)

- Chaz Frye throwing the ball late, back arcoss his body into triple teams at the goal line

-4 games a year where it seems nobody gives a shit

-Lack of discipline

[sandlot33]

I would see no reason why they would not do this

[Mr. MacPhisto]

I agree with everyone. Chudzinski is here already. Maybe the FO had an inkling that this might happen?

Dump Crennel and bring back Marty. Wouldn't that be an amazing story if he takes the Browns back to prominence and finally wins a Super Bowl upon return to Cleveland?

The guy can turn around football teams. I want him as our head coach.

[Guest]

And does anyone out there actually believe Romeo Crennel has what it takes to win a sausage? Come on now ...

I believe RAC could win a sausage. He'd probably do quite well in eating contests for many types of breakfast meats.

[furls]

I would settle for any coach that would bring respectability back to Cleveland football. Hell, they wouldn't even have to go .500, just give me hope that they will and if I were a betting man, I would say that there is a 90% that Marty would make this team respectable within two years, hell, I think it could even happen next year.

As for winning the big one, wouldn't it be nice to be somewhere near a big one again? This is something that has not happend since the last time Marty was in Cleveland.

[Dozen]

At this point in the year I cant see making a change. The combines are approaching, then FA and the draft. I find it kind of funny how Chud is considered a nobody, then Marty gets canned and now everyone is saying "Bring Marty back, he already has Chud here". Let this season play out then if you must there will be some very good coaches available.

[pup]

1. Is it Marty's fault that his teams lose big games? No. But they still lose them for whatever reason. If it is not his fault they lose, then how is it because of him they get there? He has had some of the best teams to coach during his career, yet has not got it done when it counted.

2. Why makes anyone here think Marty wants anything to do with Cleveland? If he was to come here, and they went even 6-10 next year, he will spend most of the season listenting to the "We should have waited and gone after Cowher" bullshit.

3. The Chargers would probably hire RAC and win the Super Bowl next year, it is just the way it works for us.

And as ass backwards as this conclusion is, based on points 1-3, go ahead and give him a call. The problem is he will probably not say anything as long as RAC is still the Head Coach, so you are going to have to fire him and hope Marty accepts. If he turns you down, where do we go?

[consigliere]

It is a no brainer to give Shcott another shot now. I don't care if Bill Cowher or whoever might be available next offseason. RAC is a lame duck coach, which makes the 2007 pretty much a lame duck season. That makes me feel REAL good as a ticket buying fan.

And, it is not too late to make a coaching change. All the combines and draft prep is truly in Savage's ballcourt. I mean, does RAC even have much input into these things (I doubt it). So, it doesn't hurt a thing to bring in Marty. And, while I am hardly a fan of Chud at this point, he did work under Marty last year so they are probably on the same page.

If they don't even try to get Marty, and are just hell bent on keeping RAC, it just makes me laugh even hardly at this franchise.

As Swerb said, go get the gleam!

[pup]

The Chargers are paying Marty $4 million to not coach. There will be a bunch of jobs after this season, there always are. I just don't think it is reasonable to think he would come here.

I wasn't saying I want Cowher, but you know what it is like in this city and if they get off to a slow start, this town will begin to cry for him.

[Dozen]

Right, Right no brainer. Im sure Savage isnt already looking for players to fit into Rac's system or anything. Lets hire Marty and Draft Quinn. Super Bowl here we come

[pup]

If Marty brings his 15 Pro Bowlers with him from San Diego, we have a shot.

[swerb]

The bottom line is this ...

Marty has resurrected three terrible franchises, never bringing any of his pro bowlers from past jobs with him.

The 1984 Browns, 1988 Chiefs, and 2000 Chargers were all terrible teams, devoid of talent. Marty had all three teams in the playoffs in short order. He has not won a title. But his ability to make chocolate mousse out of dog shit is indisputable.

Also, I don't buy the notion that Marty is not likely to have interest. He wanted to continue coaching this season. I read a column this morning (will find link) from after the lose to NE, where he clearly stated that teh inner fires are still burning and he has no desire to hang em up.

What a better situation to go to? If he does want to coach this season, theres no jobs left! If the team is interested, Lerner will back up the Brinks Truck for him and almost assuredly offer a transition into the front office as his coaching career winds down.

[Guest]

I wish they would.

But I give them practically zero chance of pulling the trigger.

Hell, even when they make a good move, they compound it with something else stupid...like getting a great player in K2, but giving up a second to move up one spot.

Yes, my formerly boundless optimism has been beaten into submission by the reality of Browns V2.0.

[consigliere]

Right, Right no brainer. Im sure Savage isnt already looking for players to fit into Rac's system or anything.

And Marty's system is different how? marty uses the 3-4, likes to stp the run and also feature the run on offense....everything this org is trying to establish now.

[Dozen]

Very good points I guess, but Vince Lombardi couldnt help this team that much next season. Marty aint coming and anyone who thinks he is is dillusional.

[yogi]

The Ultimate objective here, unless I'm mistaken, is to win a Superbowl.

Its not to:

- make the playoffs
- beat the Steelers
- have a winning divisional record
- lose in the Conference Championship game

Have you guys really forgotten? Marty takes teams that on talent alone should win championships and loses every time.

He didn't lose because Byner fumbled. Elway had a drive, what evr the reasons were in KC and now SD.

He loses because he gets OUTCOACHED in the big games.

We've been there, done, that.

No Thanks!

[Mr. MacPhisto]

The Ultimate objective here, unless I'm mistaken, is to win a Superbowl.

Its not to:

- make the playoffs
- beat the Steelers
- have a winning divisional record
- lose in the Conference Championship game

Have you guys really forgotten? Marty takes teams that on talent alone should win championships and loses every time.

He didn't lose because Byner fumbled. Elway had a drive, what evr the reasons were in KC and now SD.

He loses because he gets OUTCOACHED in the big games.

We've been there, done, that.

No Thanks!

So RAC is better? Who do you suggest we get next year that we know can turn us around?

Maybe we can go through 10 more years of losing until we finally find a head coach that can turn us around. I don't think Cowher is a lock to come here and, honestly, a large part of me prefers Schottenheimer because there are several things about Cowher that I don't like. Th guy had lots of choke jobs just like Marty did before finally getting ovr the hump. Who's to say that Marty wouldn't finally do it in Cleveland?

I do want to win a Super Bowl, but who's going to rebuild this team. I have no faith in Lerner to find a guy. I'm iffy on Phil Savage and actually think he could work well with Schottenheimer because I don't think Phil loves the GM duties and I don't think he likes getting in power struggles - he really loves the scouting portion and I do think he could find guys that Marty wants.

Marty Schottenheimer is as close to a stone-cold lock that you can get when it comes to getting back to a consistent winner. He's done it everywhere except Washington where he was canned unfairly after only one year by the worst owner in the league.

The other alternative is that we become the Arizona Cardinals and take this once great franchise into the toilet for decades ala the Indians in the 1960s. Marty can restore the honor. Marty can reinvigorate the fanbase. I know thta I've been largely disinterested in the Browns because they've become a waste of my time. I read the articles. I follow the roster. This genuinely excites me and a Marty hire would guarantee I'd be watching. It'd also guarantee that I'd run out immediately and buy a bunch of Browns stuff because of my excitement.

Marty Schottenheimer would bring winning back to the North Coast. You can question his postseason abilities but we haven't been serious postseason contenders since Marty left (that 1989 team doesn't count, 9-6-1 is not a serious playoff contender). We actually need to win in the regular season first. Marty can rebuild the roster and get the most out of our players.

[swerb]

If Super Bowl Title Or Bust in the next 2-3 was the modus operandi, then why is this stooge Crennel still the head coach? Does anyone honestly believe that this man can comandeer this franchise to a Super Bowl win? Come on now.

Crennel is still the coach ONLY because there was not a strong candidate out there, and the team wasn't about to roll the dice again this soon, especially with 33 mill to spend on FA's and the specter of instability already in the air.

You can argue whether or not Marty is that strong candidate, but the reason why he is still here is fact.

The Browns are so far away from winning a SB it's not even funny. This team needs to learn how to crawl before they learn how to walk. They need to learn HOW to win before we can even start to talk about them as a winning football team. And you think that this chump Romeo is going to be the man to take this team to that next level? Some career assistant, hired and passed over by other smarter teams on numerous occasions? An overmatched pushover who knows nothing about offense and couldn't even control a rookie WR this season?

The whole "can't win the big one" tag is the most overrated and overused stereotype in sports. We heard the same thing about Bill Cowher for years and years. It was his fault O'Donnell got Larry Browned, right? Cowher can't win the big one, always had one of the best teams. I was saying it too ... I hate that SOB. He seemed to be OK in big games in January 2006.

There's 20 different isolated events, totally outside of Marty's control, that could have easily gone the other way .... leading to a win for his team and the shedding of the stereotype.

Again, the John Hart reference keeps coming to mind. For years, that guy took so much shit in this town. Yet ... if Nagy lifts his glove a split second earlier, catches that Renteria liner, the man is a hero. He is The Guy that finally did it in this town. Nagy didn't, we lose, and Hart is an idiot.

[furls]

the goal is to get to a super bowl: Well right now the city of cleveland is like a guy, by himself at the bar as closing time is approaching, anyone will do.

How does keeping RAC get that done? Right now he is a lame duck coach and everyone in the NFL knows it. Things are so bad that I dont think the Browns would be able to get any coordinator with other options to come here. Stick a fork in the Crennel era... please.

I am not sure how many more years Marty will coach, but I say give him two years and I bet we are looking at the playoffs. I am not anywhere near this confident with Crennel. As for waiting for next year, who will be available then? Cowher? There are no guarantees or even good rumors that he will go back to coaching next year, besides, should Cowher come back what is to say that he would go back to Cleveland? Why? Because he played here? Frankly, I think that as John Fox's seat in Carolina gets hotter the odds of Cowher taking a job are getting smaller, since that is where his family is living and will most likely stay.

[pup]

Crennel is still the coach ONLY because there was not a strong candidate out there, and the team wasn't about to roll the dice again this soon, especially with 33 mill to spend on FA's and the specter of instability already in the air.

Well, obviously other teams felt there were strong enough candidates out there, that is why they changed coaches. The San Diego Chargers obviuosly feel there is still a candadite out there, that is why they are changing coaches.

If it is such a sure thing here in Cleveland or around the NFL that Romeo will be shit canned after this year, how does that do anything to help a team with 33 mill to spend and the specter of instability in the air? If Romeo is a goner, wouldn't it have made more sense to fire him this year, so you get better players/coaches in here with all this money?

There's 20 different isolated events, totally outside of Marty's control, that could have easily gone the other way .... leading to a win for his team and the shedding of the stereotype.

Then you would think ONCE things would have bounced his way. But they don't. Why that is I have no idea, but it is without a doubt a fact. Did Marty win in San Diego because of his great game planning or was it AJ Smith finding a roster of All-Pros? Martty does not make good teams great, great teams make Marty good.

So RAC is better?

We don't know. RAC has NEVER had the same oppurtunity to coach the best personel in the league, as Marty has. He has never benefited from his GM trading a draft pick for 3 All-Pros.

I am not anywhere near this confident with Crennel

And you shouldn't be, because he has not had the chance to gain your confidence. The Cleveland Browns are the LEAST talented team in the NFL. You really think changing a coach is going to change that?

There are no guarantees or even good rumors that he will go back to coaching next year, besides, should Cowher come back what is to say that he would go back to Cleveland? Why? Because he played here?

So why is Marty coming back here? Because he used to coach here? Remember, we ran him out of town. Now he is going to come back here, when he probably only has 4 or 5 years left to coach to take over this disaster of a roster?

[Mr. MacPhisto]

Projections for next year seem to indicate that up to 10 teams may need heac coaches. If we hire Marty then it's likely down to around eight. I'm not sure where some of the projections came from, but I read them on ESPN (that's probably where).

The people down here in Tampa have indicated that they are pining for Cowher and Gruden's contract is up after the season. One more crappy year (likely) and the Glazers will likely be willing to send Bill Cowher a Brinks truck. Maybe he'll come to Cleveland instead, I don't know.

However, right now there's only one team who needs a HC and they're the Chargers. If Marty wants to coach next year, we have no one to compete with. If he, Phil, and the Lerners just look at some of the Browns boards they will see that an awful lot of people would welcome Marty back with open arms.

I also have to say, looking at Marty's bio due to his canning - Why the hell didn't we just hire Marty in 1999? He was available. Looking back, it seems to me that if we would have gone back to Schottenheimer then we wouldn't have had to endure the past 7+ years.

[consigliere]

Rack Swerb on the last post. 150% in agreement here on that.

And, if I may add, I don't give a shit about Marty's failures in the playoffs. I'd be freaking elated to just make the playoffs at this point. Let Marty get this team re-established, and then when we are ready to take that step to Super Bowl level, see what he wants to do. Who knows, he may be fine with moving to a FO position and having us bring in a coach to take us to that elite level we want to be.....or we stick with Marty and see what happens.

To add, although it is a VERY small sample size, 85% of the people voting on Marty on the front page want him back. It is clear there is a strong outcry to get him.....

[leadpipe]

The Ultimate objective here, unless I'm mistaken, is to win a Superbowl.

Its not to:

- make the playoffs
- beat the Steelers
- have a winning divisional record
- lose in the Conference Championship game

Have you guys really forgotten? Marty takes teams that on talent alone should win championships and loses every time.

He didn't lose because Byner fumbled. Elway had a drive, what evr the reasons were in KC and now SD.

He loses because he gets OUTCOACHED in the big games.

We've been there, done, that.

No Thanks!

To win the Super Bowl in the next couple of years is not a reasonable objective. A more reasonable one might be to Allow fans to walk in that stadium on a Sunday not feeling like total assholes that they spent money on a garbage product. In your words he "takes teams that on talent alone should win championships...." Well, they need to get to that point somehow. Nobody else in the organization since they've come back has figured it out.

Swerb, you forgot about the Redskins. He HAS failed in big games. He HAS NEVER failed in turning around teams in pitiful shape.

It's likely not going to happen. But it would be good for the Browns if it did.

[Dozen]

It just seems so far of a reach Im just turned off by the whole topic. Bottom line is he's not coming here either way if it would be good, bad whatever. Although going back and reading up on Marty I found this to be quite impressive.

[pup]

You guys are making arguments to bring back Marty because he has turned bad teams into good teams. Note that those teams made good personel decisions, which Marty has had very little to do with. If him coming here turns Phil Savage into AJ Smith, Ernie Accorsi, or Carl Peterson, then go ahead and do it. Otherwise, you are asking him to come in here and do what NOBODY in the NFL can do, win without talent.

Why the hell didn't we just hire Marty in 1999? He was available. Looking back, it seems to me that if we would have gone back to Schottenheimer then we wouldn't have had to endure the past 7+ years.

Why? Would he have kept Dwight Clark from being incompetent? Nothing he could have done would have changed Tim Couch, Courtney Brown, Gerard Warren.... The team has sucked since 1999 because they have had terrible players. They have had terrible players because they made bad choices. NOTHING will change until they hit the mark in an off season, then everything will change. There are no miracles. There are no magic potions. There are talented players, led by talented coaches. It takes both. We are progressing. We have more talent than any time since 1999. We do not have enough, but this off season will determine how much more needs to be done. If we had the talent to contend with others in our division, we would contend. Since we don't, we don't. Romeo, Marty, Lombardi, Parcells, Tressell, Shula, Myer, JC, me, Swerb, Consig, Dozen would not "make" this team a winner. Better players will.

[furls]

The team has sucked since 1999 because of bad management/coaching, worse FA signings, and the worst drafting over that era (including the lions).

[Mr. MacPhisto]

You guys are making arguments to bring back Marty because he has turned bad teams into good teams. Note that those teams made good personel decisions, which Marty has had very little to do with. If him coming here turns Phil Savage into AJ Smith, Ernie Accorsi, or Carl Peterson, then go ahead and do it. Otherwise, you are asking him to come in here and do what NOBODY in the NFL can do, win without talent.

Hey, that's happened most places Marty has gone to. AJ Smith was not the GM when Marty came on board. While Smith has done a good job, it takes good people to mold talent.

Why? Would he have kept Dwight Clark from being incompetent? Nothing he could have done would have changed Tim Couch, Courtney Brown, Gerard Warren.... The team has sucked since 1999 because they have had terrible players. They have had terrible players because they made bad choices. NOTHING will change until they hit the mark in an off season, then everything will change. There are no miracles. There are no magic potions. There are talented players, led by talented coaches. It takes both. We are progressing. We have more talent than any time since 1999. We do not have enough, but this off season will determine how much more needs to be done. If we had the talent to contend with others in our division, we would contend. Since we don't, we don't. Romeo, Marty, Lombardi, Parcells, Tressell, Shula, Myer, JC, me, Swerb, Consig, Dozen would not "make" this team a winner. Better players will.

They've drafted guys who were talented in college. Marty might've leaned in a different direction and caused different guys to be drafted. Even with who we drafted, the first couple of years are imperative in player development. Even a monkey throwing darts to pick draftees will land some talent that a good coach can develop.

And how much have we developed?

Better players will make the team a winner, but people said the same things about teams Marty took over and turned around. Sometimes you have more than you think but you need a coach who can get the most out of his players, who can make them work together.

Do you seriously think RAC could lead an overly talented team to the playoffs? I don't. We need someone to guide what we have. We need someone to instill discipline in the players we have. We need someone to be consistent and employ consistent schemes on both sides of the ball.

We haven't had that and THAT ruins any talent you might ever have.

Not hiring Marty Schottenheimer right now just shows that the Browns are dedicated to losing. They want to become the Cardinals. We need someone to change the culture. Marty Schottenheimer can and will if given the chance.

[leadpipe]

You guys are making arguments to bring back Marty because he has turned bad teams into good teams. Note that those teams made good personel decisions, which Marty has had very little to do with. If him coming here turns Phil Savage into AJ Smith, Ernie Accorsi, or Carl Peterson, then go ahead and do it. Otherwise, you are asking him to come in here and do what NOBODY in the NFL can do, win without talent.

Why the hell didn't we just hire Marty in 1999? He was available. Looking back, it seems to me that if we would have gone back to Schottenheimer then we wouldn't have had to endure the past 7+ years.

Why? Would he have kept Dwight Clark from being incompetent? Nothing he could have done would have changed Tim Couch, Courtney Brown, Gerard Warren.... The team has sucked since 1999 because they have had terrible players. They have had terrible players because they made bad choices. NOTHING will change until they hit the mark in an off season, then everything will change. There are no miracles. There are no magic potions. There are talented players, led by talented coaches. It takes both. We are progressing. We have more talent than any time since 1999. We do not have enough, but this off season will determine how much more needs to be done. If we had the talent to contend with others in our division, we would contend. Since we don't, we don't. Romeo, Marty, Lombardi, Parcells, Tressell, Shula, Myer, JC, me, Swerb, Consig, Dozen would not "make" this team a winner. Better players will.

We make a lot of assumptions on this board regarding prospects, draft picks, guys coming back from injury etc. We are now dealing with a proven commodity. He is four for four in these situations, each with different variables as far as player talent and management. He would come here and build a winner. The proof is in the pudding. Bottom line is, he can either build a winner here or build it somewhere else. One thing is for certain, as his record indicates time and time again, he's gonna build it.

As far as taking teams that have been poor franchises for years before he arrived, Shottenheimer has no equal in the history of the league. The Browns are in a very bad way. There is no way he wouldn't help.

[yogi]

A lot to reply to, I'll do my best.......

Mr. Macphisto:

So RAC is better? Who do you suggest we get next year that we know can turn us around?

Probably not. But I KNOW Marty isn't good enough. Listen Marty's had a thousand years and many, many good teams. He doesn't possess the ring.

Now RAC has 4-6 rings. He's been on winners. I've admitted before that he probably doesn't have what it takes to be a good HC, but a few things...
Its not right to give the man 2 years with this garbage of a football team and bail on him.
We'd be critcized (and rightly so) around the league for doing so.
RAC can definately improve our D and make it one of the tops in the NFL. He'll retire after next season anyway (probably) and the team will be in better shape, more stability and maybe, just maybe be an attractive team to a top notch HC candidate.

I do want to win a Super Bowl, but who's going to rebuild this team.

Its happening. We've got some real talent for once but the same ol bad luck. That's due to change. Maybe when we sign a great FA, he'll actually get to play for us. And maybe the guys we draft will be able to fullfill their promise.

Don't bail now. It takes more than 2 years. Sometimes dramatic improvements are seen between years 2 and 3 and years 3 and 4.

Swerb:

If Super Bowl Title Or Bust in the next 2-3 was the modus operandi, then why is this stooge Crennel still the head coach? Does anyone honestly believe that this man can comandeer this franchise to a Super Bowl win? Come on now.

Because he's been part of Superbowl WINNERS!!!!

Its possible, kinda looks like a black Weeb Eubanks to me!

Crennel is still the coach ONLY because there was not a strong candidate out there, and the team wasn't about to roll the dice again this soon, especially with 33 mill to spend on FA's and the specter of instability already in the air.

You can argue whether or not Marty is that strong candidate, but the reason why he is still here is fact.

Well, well, well, see it happens! The FO CAN make a good decision once in a while. Staying the course with a proven defensive guy will at least build the D while we look for that missing link in leading the O. Maybe its Chud.

But it DAMN sure ain't Marty!

I've been there and done that with that boob. Maybe you're too young to remember but those years were OURS, we were a much better team than the Broncoes and we should have had 2 Superbowl appearances back then , probably splitting them.

Marty spit the bit. Tore up our golden opportunity card and then made sure of it with the likes of drafting Mad Dog Mike Junkin and all those forgettable drafts.

The MAIN reason why we were so good is that Ernie Acorsi signed a whole bunch of great USFL football players and Bernie made a manuver that made him a Brown.

It wasn't because of Marty!

The Browns are so far away from winning a SB it's not even funny. This team needs to learn how to crawl before they learn how to walk.

They're not as far as you think. In the NFL, you're never taht far away unless you keep changing shit every other year!

The whole "can't win the big one" tag is the most overrated and overused stereotype in sports. We heard the same thing about Bill Cowher for years and years.

With Marty, that tag is fucking EARNED!

Let Cowher win a second one. I think it was a little lucky the way the breaks fell for that chinless bastard.

And I don't want his ugly ass coaching my team. Fuck Cowher too!

There's 20 different isolated events, totally outside of Marty's control, that could have easily gone the other way .... leading to a win for his team and the shedding of the stereotype.

20 events? What do they all have in common??

Let me tell you, the Browns were so much better than the Broncoes in those years the game shouldn't have even been close! They were because that's the way Marty played it.

Guys do yourself a favor, go back and watch the 86 and 87 AFC Championship games.

Why do you want that guy back?

f'n loser!

[Guest]

I don't want him back
Being just competitive is what we want? Horrible
I want to win it all, not go 14-2 with a loaded team and take a dump in the playoffs.
The guy is an f'ing loser

[General]

Alot of great input on this one. Do I think RAC is the man? NO! Do I think Savage can assemble a championship team? NO! I too was victimized by 86-87 Broncos games but I would sleep with your mother in law for a winner. Marty? Maybe, but it is true we would be heavily chastized throughout the league and become even more of a siberian wasteland than we already are for puttin the big weiner in Crennels sizeable booty. We need to trade down and acquire players, millions of them, to build a core of talent. Berea should look like the scene in "The Ten Commandments" when the Jews were released from Egypt as far as body counts go. (Not endorsing the costumes or making a religious statement one way or the other).

[furls]

Sometimes dramatic improvements are seen between years 2 and 3 and years 3 and 4.

sometimes the sun shines on my dogs asshole and sometimes the pick three comes up 666.

Its not right to give the man 2 years with this garbage of a football team and bail on him.

It is not right by the fans and the city to give the guy a third year when the team has regressed from bad to hopeless under his tenure. ALl the while showing poor discipline and fundamentals.

We'd be critcized (and rightly so) around the league for doing so.

so what? at least we may see some improvement. Hell we could potentially even get 5 wins next year!

RAC can definately improve our D and make it one of the tops in the NFL.

Great, maybe he can figure out a way to get them on the field for 60 minutes per game instead of the 40 they spent on the field last year.

just maybe be an attractive team to a top notch HC candidate.

floundering for three years will make someone want to come here more? and who the hell are these top notch HC candidates everyone keeps talking about?

And maybe the guys we draft will be able to fullfill their promise.

That is a direct reflection of scouting and coaching.

Don't bail now. It takes more than 2 years.

Yes it does, but your team should not be considerably worse after the second year than it was at the start of the rebuild.

Because he's been part of Superbowl WINNERS!!!!

Which team was it that he was the head coach of that won a superbowl? If I recall correctly, he was a defensive coordinator on a team with a head coach that basically ran the defense.

Staying the course with a proven defensive guy will at least build the D while we look for that missing link in leading the O. Maybe its Chud.

But it DAMN sure ain't Marty!

how many years would you like to look? At this point we should see some direction. I challenge you, tell me what the Browns do well on offense. Blame it on the change in coordinators if you must, but this offense is a ship adrift on a course to nowhere.

I've been there and done that with that boob. Maybe you're too young to remember but those years were OURS, we were a much better team than the Broncoes and we should have had 2 Superbowl appearances back then , probably splitting

That is laughable. I too remember watching those games, and while we could have won both conference titles, I do not think there is any way you are going to convince me that the Browns should have probably won either of those super bowls. Probably implies 80% chance of winning. There is no way you can say that the Browns would have enjoyed that type of success with the 1986 Giants or the 1987 Redskins. They may have split them, it was possible, but not probable.

They're not as far as you think. In the NFL, you're never taht far away unless you keep changing shit every other year!

It is funny, in this point you make exactly the point why RC should go. In a league with this much parity (as you implied), simply being this far behind your peers consistently is a telling sign.

f'n loser!

funny, because he has actually proven to be a winner, just not of superbowls and right now, for this team I would settle for them just not sucking the sweat off of a dead man's balls and actually embarassing a city that caught a river on fire.

[jfiling]

But his ability to make chocolate mousse out of dog shit is indisputable.

1) Amen, Swerb
2) Nice use of a colorful phrase I hadn't seen before.[/i]

[Mr. MacPhisto]

That is laughable. I too remember watching those games, and while we could have won both conference titles, I do not think there is any way you are going to convince me that the Browns should have probably won either of those super bowls. Probably implies 80% chance of winning. There is no way you can say that the Browns would have enjoyed that type of success with the 1986 Giants or the 1987 Redskins. They may have split them, it was possible, but not probable.

They would have had the best chance versus the Giants, but the NFC dominated for so long for a reason. I think you could make a solid argument that both Super Bowls would have been more entertaining, but I can't say the Browns could have one either one. In full agreement there.

In all honesty, I think Marty's SD team talent-wise had the best chance to really win a title. The NFC was just so strong in the 1980s, just as the AFC has been dominate lately. Actually moreso. Even in the 90s, Buffalo put together four damn good teams and got to the Super Bowl for four straight years, yet they only had a chance during SB XXV.

People point to Marty's lack of playoff success. They fail to see that he lost to Elway a lot - no longer a factor - and that his Chiefs teams were taken out a couple of times by those pretty good Bills squads.

Three losses to Elway.
Three losses to Marino.
Two losses to Kelly.

Eight of his 13 postseason losses were to teams featuring Hall of Famers at QB. Elway and Marino were both comeback specialists. Hell, Brady is too or had been. Jim Kelly was surrounded by the best AFC team of the early-to-mid 90s.

Marty's lack of playoff success is a combination of some mistakes on his part, missed blocks, fumbles, missed kicks, etc.

And as for RAC having rings, so what? He wasn't the head coach. There are members of the Buccaneer Radio network that were given rings after the Bucs won the Super Bowl. Do you think they could do a better job than Marty?

You can make the "stable" argument till you're blue in the face. It doesn't matter because Romeo Crennel will be fired after next season barring stupidity on the part of ownership or a miracle that causes him to be a good coach. He can't motivate players. He can't be a leader to his coaching staff. He's not a leader of men.

Romeo is a lame duck. I'd rather have someone with a proven track record who has turned things around. You can also argue about the great GMs too, but sometimes the coach makes the GM look good.

[yogi]

Quote:
Sometimes dramatic improvements are seen between years 2 and 3 and years 3 and 4.


sometimes the sun shines on my dogs asshole and sometimes the pick three comes up 666.

so your counter point to my making a case for continuity is your dog's asshole? And I don't get the 666 reference.

Quote:
Its not right to give the man 2 years with this garbage of a football team and bail on him.


It is not right by the fans and the city to give the guy a third year when the team has regressed from bad to hopeless under his tenure. ALl the while showing poor discipline and fundamentals.

The Browns played a much rougher schedule in 06 than 05. Want to argue that? You'd be wrong.

The Browns also spent a shitload of money on a pro-bowl center that didn't play a down and then the back-up went AWOL.
The team found out that KW2 , Sean Jones and Kam W. can not only play in this league but are guys to build around.

Discipline? I thought we were one of the fewest penalized teams (yes, 4th best in the NFL fewest penalties)

Quote:
We'd be critcized (and rightly so) around the league for doing so.


so what? at least we may see some improvement. Hell we could potentially even get 5 wins next year!

maybe I don't want to see Cleveland as a laughingstock of the NFL. You know lots of teams lose, but the Browns would be making a classless move. Sort Bengal-like.
Is 5 wins your goal? LOL......

Quote:
just maybe be an attractive team to a top notch HC candidate.


floundering for three years will make someone want to come here more? and who the hell are these top notch HC candidates everyone keeps talking about?

My point was...... giving RAC a 3rd year will give stability to the franchise. I assume we'll have a better defense and I don't believe next year will be a disaster.

Quote:
And maybe the guys we draft will be able to fullfill their promise.


That is a direct reflection of scouting and coaching.

and your point is? Wimbley? Jones? DQ?

Quote:
Don't bail now. It takes more than 2 years.


Yes it does, but your team should not be considerably worse after the second year than it was at the start of the rebuild.

you keep saying the team is worse now than 2 years ago. But I keep NOT agreeing with that point!

Quote:
Because he's been part of Superbowl WINNERS!!!!


Which team was it that he was the head coach of that won a superbowl? If I recall correctly, he was a defensive coordinator on a team with a head coach that basically ran the defense.

That's Bullshit!

RAC may not have the HC credentials, but he can build a Defense and you cannot simply wave your hand and dismiss all that he's done because it was under Parcells or Bellichick.

Quote:
Staying the course with a proven defensive guy will at least build the D while we look for that missing link in leading the O. Maybe its Chud.

But it DAMN sure ain't Marty!


how many years would you like to look? At this point we should see some direction. I challenge you, tell me what the Browns do well on offense. Blame it on the change in coordinators if you must, but this offense is a ship adrift on a course to nowhere.

3 years at a minimum. This is a big year for RAC and Phil.

The Browns don't particularly do anything well on offense, but they have a few players and need to upgrade their weak links. Chud will need to determine what they can do well and build upon it. Its tough when Charlie did not develop they way they wanted.

Quote:
I've been there and done that with that boob. Maybe you're too young to remember but those years were OURS, we were a much better team than the Broncoes and we should have had 2 Superbowl appearances back then , probably splitting


That is laughable. I too remember watching those games, and while we could have won both conference titles, I do not think there is any way you are going to convince me that the Browns should have probably won either of those super bowls. Probably implies 80% chance of winning. There is no way you can say that the Browns would have enjoyed that type of success with the 1986 Giants or the 1987 Redskins. They may have split them, it was possible, but not probable.

The Browns probably would have lost to the 86 Giants but were better than the 87 Redskins led by Doug Williams.

Quote:
They're not as far as you think. In the NFL, you're never taht far away unless you keep changing shit every other year!


It is funny, in this point you make exactly the point why RC should go. In a league with this much parity (as you implied), simply being this far behind your peers consistently is a telling sign.

No, the point I made is why you stay with someone more than 2 years. How the hell is consistently 2 years or less. Especially when you inherited the cesspool of a team that Butch left them?

Quote:
f'n loser!


funny, because he has actually proven to be a winner, just not of superbowls and right now, for this team I would settle for them just not sucking the sweat off of a dead man's balls and actually embarassing a city that caught a river on fire.

When a man leads a talented team consistently to LESS than their potential, when you play all the time...not to lose... and you never learn from your mistakes, that IMO would be a fucking loser!

Go on. Settle.

I want better than Shottenheimer for my team.
[/quote]

[S4Aero]

A couple of quick points.

Yogi, while I normally agree with you, I must beg to differ here. Marty was not outcoached in either of the AFC Champ games in the 80's. His players failed to execute. Missed tackles, blown assignments, and simple bad breaks. I was at The Drive, and screamed with the other 80,000 people, but the facts remain that a couple plays go our way, and we win that game AND the following year. The legend of "Marty Ball" is overblown. He builds competitive teams that CAN win the big game. Bad bounces, dropped passes, fumbles, and his rep leaves him on the outside looking in.

Also, we didn't "run him out of town". The city was stunned when Modell fired him. That remains one of the darkest days in Cleveland Sports History, and arguably was the beginning of "The Betrayal" by Modell (spit). I could (and have) made a cogent argument that everything that followed that move was a step toward November '95.

I would bring him back - YESTERDAY!

[papacass]

I'll take Marty to rebuild the team, so long as when the time comes to win the AFC Championship Game, we dump him and re-hire Bill Belichick.

That has to be a prerequisite to any Marty deal.

[furls]

Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes dramatic improvements are seen between years 2 and 3 and years 3 and 4.


sometimes the sun shines on my dogs asshole and sometimes the pick three comes up 666.


so your counter point to my making a case for continuity is your dog's asshole? And I don't get the 666 reference.

The point was a simple one, lots of things happen sometimes. All "sometimes" tells me is that it is within the realm of possibilities, but it in no way speaks to its likelihood. As a matter of fact, the word "Sometimes" in and of itself conotes that an event is rather unlikely.

The Browns played a much rougher schedule in 06 than 05. Want to argue that? You'd be wrong.

Ok, the schedule was rougher, does that explain why the offense was a total trainwreck? As for LeCharles Bentley, the center play was really the least of the Browns problems up front last year.

Now about the KW2 thing, yes, he was good and he could be a guy that you could build around, but he was horribly used this year. Who's fault is that? Oh, thats right, the HC has no say in how players are used it must have all been Mo C's problem.

Discipline? I thought we were one of the fewest penalized teams (yes, 4th best in the NFL fewest penalties)

Penalties are only one way to measure discipline.

maybe I don't want to see Cleveland as a laughingstock of the NFL. You know lots of teams lose, but the Browns would be making a classless move. Sort Bengal-like.

News flash, under RC the Browns have cemented their position with the Lions and Cardinals as laughingstocks. How have those classless Bengals done lately?

Is 5 wins your goal? LOL......

Duh, Sarcasm, but since you said something.... it sure feels like it is the organizations goal. Did you hear RC congratulate his team in the press conference after losing to the Steelers? He basically said, well it wasnt as bad as the ass-whooping we took last year.

My point was...... giving RAC a 3rd year will give stability to the franchise.

I disagree; it actually destabilizes the team for one more year. Everyone knows that barring a serious turnaround next year (I am not holding my breath) he is out. So we are prolonging the inevitable.

you keep saying the team is worse now than 2 years ago. But I keep NOT agreeing with that point!

Hmmm, actually they do appear to be MUCH BETTER.

2004 Cleveland Browns: 4-12
2006 Cleveland Browns: 4-12

OFFENSE:
2004
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
318 510 3247 6.37 15 25 372 1335 3.59 7 4582
NFL rank ---> 15 19 20 24 27 32 31 31 29 28 30

2006
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
251 438 3076 7.02 21 21 441 1657 3.76 6 4733
NFL rank ---> 29 30 26 16 18 27 17 23 27 32 28

DEFENSE:

2004
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
277 461 2901 6.29 17 15 532 2314 4.35 22 5215
NFL rank ---> 8 3 5 10 6 21 30 32 21 32 15

2006
|---------- PASSING -----------||----- RUSHING -----| TOTAL
CMP ATT YD YPA TD INT ATT YD YPA TD YD
283 499 3242 6.50 20 18 514 2273 4.42 14 5515
NFL rank ---> 7 8 15 20 14 10 30 29 23 17 27

From the stats above, it is clear the 2006 Browns had a much better offense, going from 30-28th in the league. But man that kick ass Crennel defense fell from 15-27. That means at this rate the Browns will have the number 1 offense in the league by around 2035, but unfortunately the defense will be ranked 189th. If that is the kind of progress you are happy with, well, man, I wish you were my boss.

RAC may not have the HC credentials, but he can build a Defense and you cannot simply wave your hand and dismiss all that he's done because it was under Parcells or Bellichick.

Nope, I can't wave my hand and dismiss it, but I can show stats that dismiss it. See above and by the way, from 2001 to 2004 the Patriots on average were the 15th best defense in the league, and somehow, they were good this year again (without Crennel). Parcells and Belichick are known defensive micromanagers and as a result, their defenses are pretty stock regardless of their DC.

3 years at a minimum. This is a big year for RAC and Phil.

Yep, I am putting the over/under for their entrance into the unemployment line at week 9.

The Browns don't particularly do anything well on offense, but they have a few players and need to upgrade their weak links.

I count three good players on the Browns offense: KW2, BE, and Vickers. KW2 was on the team in 2004, so I guess we have accumulated two other good offensive players in 2 years (I cannot jump high enough to express my joy). I guess that means just 8 more weak links to upgrade!

The Browns probably would have lost to the 86 Giants but were better than the 87 Redskins led by Doug Williams

The '87 Redskins were pretty damn good and Doug Williams actually led that team to a #3 offensive ranking. They thrashed the same Bronco's team that put 38 on the Browns in the AFC championship game 42-10. Yep, I get that same feeling too.... The Browns would have crushed them! That '87 Redskins team was actually one of the best teams of the 80's.

Go on. Settle.

I want better than Shottenheimer for my team.

and RAC is clearly better than Marty.

[wmurphyhh]

Good to see a topic generate so many posts so quickly.

Sounds to me like those that want Marty back are just longing for the past. So why not bring him back as the club president ? I don't think Marty has too much coaching left in him. If he did, he would have took that extension offered by SD after his customary exit from the playoffs.

Hiring him as the president would link the fans back to the Dawgs of the late 80s. It would allow Phil to be on the road doing what he does best in scouting players. Marty could become the face of the team to the public...Randy could stay in London to upgrade his futbol team. RAC would have someone to offer some advice on a few topics.

[Mr. MacPhisto]

The Browns probably would have lost to the 86 Giants but were better than the 87 Redskins led by Doug Williams.

Funny, I always thought they had a better shot against the Giants and no hope against the Redskins. That performance by Doug Williams stands as one of the greatest in Super Bowl history. I think the Browns could have done better than 42-10, but I think the Giants of Super Bowl XXI would have given the Browns the better chance. I can't say outright that the Browns were better than either team then and I can't say that they could have beaten either team.

And also for the record, Marty is not the only coach who has gone down by playign conservative or going with the "prevent" defense that always manages to prevent jack shit.

[consigliere]

I'll never get the "can't win the big one argument." I used to subscribe to it, but I no longer do. I've seen recent players and coaches get labelled as guys who can't win the big one because of playoff failures who eventually do: Peyton Manning, Roy Williams, Jim Boeheim, Bill Cowher, Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, Mack Brown, etc. Sometimes things happen in those games beyond the control of one person, which amazes me how people lump the success or failure on one person.

I'll take Marty any day over RAC. This team, at most, is on par with the team that RAC/Savage took over after the 2004 season. In two years, there has been nil progress. Sure, some players like KWII, Jones and Wimbley have shown to be good players.....but we still need a ton more starters and lots more depth.

And how would dumping RAC be wrong or make us look bad? If anything, KEEPING HIM makes us look bad because the entire league knows he is a lame duck coach. The league is actually laughing at us! Make a bold move, cut the cord with RAC and go get Marty. Let Marty and Savage together build this team and re-establish it, and then at that time see what Marty wants to do (President? Or, keep coaching?).

[leadpipe]

What type of assistant coaches are The Browns going to get when it is apparent that Romeo is lame duck? If you were a high level assistant with options would you put yourself in that situation?

[yogi]

What type of assistant coaches are The Browns going to get when it is apparent that Romeo is lame duck?

Not sure of the question, we already have a full coaching staff. If you mean next year, well if RAC is gone, that would be predicated on the new HC.

[swerb]

The dream is over.

http://www.cantonrepository.com/index.p ... CategoryID

[furls]

Think he might still be around say... 6 or 7 games into another miserable and unispired campaign?