by neoleo » Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:02 pm
Let me ask a question.
Is it possible that Chip Kelly wasn't the Browns top choice? Seems to me like we're putting a lot of stock into the reports and "sources" of media personalities that we spend all year shitting on (rightfully so). I just don't get the hate for Haslam and Banner already, when they're going through a process that hasn't even played out yet. We're blaming them for missing their guy, when it's possible that's not even the case (and this isn't me buying the PD article, I was skeptical of those "sources" all along saying Kelly was so close to signing).
In my mind, it's very possible that Kelly was one of the Browns top choices, but not necessarily THE top choice. They had to act quickly to line up an interview for a few reasons - he's a hot commodity, he was available to be interviewed at that specific time, and because he was one of their top candidates that had the most questions to be answered. If he were 100% the top choice, I don't understand why they would have wasted their time interviewing anybody else besides Ray Horton to satisfy the Rooney Rule.
I'm sure a lot of you on this board have interviewed people in your career, and you know the person you interview first isn't always your top choice. I get the difference between an NFL coaching search and Joe Schmoe's job, but the point remains the same. You have a list of top candidates going in, you interview them as they're available, and then your list begins to reorder itself as questions become answered.
The fact that we're interviewing everybody from college coaches, to top NFL assistants, to head coaching retreads to MFing CFL coaches should be proof that these guys are going through with a process, and not just focusing in on one guy ala Shurmer.
And that, to me, is all we can ask for. Save the hate for when it's deserved, because chances are pretty high that it will be, but right now it just seems like people are mad just for the sake of being mad.