Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

Re: Chip Kelly

  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12947 posts this site

Posted: 1/17/2013 9:31 AM

Re: Chip Kelly 



DougInParma wrote:
Nasdaq wrote:

G, they can't make the distinction. If they can't see it prima facia ur wasting ur time. For chrisssake Doug E Doug just posts a link acknowledging the Iggles determination to look at the world but still obviously working Cheating Chip behind the scenes as evidence to the contrary.

For better or worse to be determined, Philly is in the back seat with their prom queen while Haslam is having excuses made for him. I won't change tune tho. Still glad we have the other 4 letter C word instead.
Again in what world is looking at Mike Nolan, Brian Billick, and Brian F. Kelly 'looking at the world'. Haslam and Banner get grief for nobody else interviewing Chud this year. So who the heck was even looking at Nolan, Billick, and Manti's non-imaginary coach? The Eagles interview process was a running punchline right up until Chip said 'Y'know, now that I've thought on it...'

But, hey, now they've got the prom date. OK, sure, just don't ask too hard about the twenties Philly keeps slipping under their date's dress.
ding ding ding...winner
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 10:53 AM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"ding ding ding...winner"

-- Are there real winners at this point? Chip and Chud are data points at this time since neither guy has been an NFL HC so far.

I agree with many that not getting saddled with Chip appears to be a good thing. And Chud at least has some NFL history.

It seems that guys are hopping on an anti-Haslam/Banner bandwagon or a pro-Haslam/Banner bandwagon at the drop of the hat. For whatever reason. I know that Haslam looks better than Lerner at least, but let's see some results before we hail or criticize Caesar too soon.

Being a prom queen can be the highest level for some or just a memory for achievers. 

The Browns may well be better off in the long-run with Haslam over Lerner. But he is a new owner and will have growing pains.

No winners so far. Just data. And opinions. The real shooting-match starts later.



Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 11:18 AM

Re: Chip Kelly 



HeadHole wrote:

Being a prom queen can be the highest level for some or just a memory for achievers. 

The Browns may well be better off in the long-run with Haslam over Lerner. But he is a new owner and will have growing pains.

No winners so far. Just data. And opinions. The real shooting-match starts later.


Never saw the movie "The Rock" and Connery's quote, eh? ;-)

I like your take. I think the misguided statement about "anti" Haslam people or whatever is really a reaction to those who would make kings without ANY data points and for "proof" yell "la la la la" I can't hear you.

Welcome. Post lots.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 12:18 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"Welcome. Post lots."

-- I appreciate the welcome. The "post lots" may be a good way to dig a ditch, crawl in and start yelling at others. That seems to be a way of posting for some. A good thing to avoid, imo. 

Which I will do one of these days. But first:

I just heard an interesting Chip-theory. Perhaps Kapernick's game against the Packers affected Kelly's attitude. Perhaps he had a stronger belief that his type of game could work in the NFL and this new attitude made him both a bit more flexible for some reason and a better target for Philly. 

The idea would be that, while his type of O isn't unheard of, Colin's performance was just another... data point... that now made him a better job interview performer.

A bit loosey-goosey, but an interesting theory. The further thought might be that Haslam/Banner interviewed a pre-Kap Kelly when he was a different, less sure and less flexible guy to a degree. Both in his attitude and in the possible NFL viablility of his approach. I guess you could look at any Harbaugh/Roman effect as well...? Like I said: Loosey-goosey.

Me, I look at Chip and I see a chubby college coach you don't want to see on the Cleveland sidelines. No matter what his flash is at the moment. Maybe he'll do well, but I'm not sure I want the Browns to be the first to try. By luck or by attitude, I think it was good that Kelly didn't end up here. Way to go, H&B.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 12:26 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


Maybe as this being reported too?

Tony Dungy, the former Buccaneers and Colts coach whose son plays at Oregon, has a theory: Kelly watched the playoffs last weekend and became more convinced than ever that his offense can work in the NFL.

“I know all the players and everyone around the University of Oregon was shocked,” Dungy said on the Dan Patrick Show. “They wouldn’t have been shocked if it had happened 12 days ago because Chip had said, ‘Hey, I’m going to take a look at these things.’ And I talked to him at that time, we talked about a few things about NFL football versus college football and that kind of thing. And I was convinced he had decided to stay. He just thought he was in a great situation and I thought that was that. But I have a guess. And I could be wrong, I don’t know, it’s just a guess. But I’ll ask you, Dan: Could it be that Chip Kelly watched the playoffs and watched Russell Wilson run a little bit of his read option in the spread offense, and watched Colin Kaepernick run a little bit more of it?”

Dungy added that he thinks Kelly watched the playoffs thinking, “My offense is way farther advanced than that, and maybe if this is going through the NFL, it might not be so tough.”

My mother never breast-fed me. She told me she liked me as a friend - Rodney Dangerfield
 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 1:13 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"Maybe as this being reported too?"

-- This isn't where I heard it, but it says what I was trying to allude to.

To bring it around to a Browns point: So we then have a "new" Kelly in the post-playoff world. Perhaps a significantly new Kelly. A Kelly that Haslam wouldn't have encountered when he talked to him and then hired Chud. So now Philly hires this new Kelly and the fun begins as we see how he and Chud will do down the road. 

But if any of this is true, it does add a twist to any Haslam opinions that are based on his interaction with Kelly. I mean, if you are open to see it.

Again, Kelly looks to me like he'd be a small-town car dealer if he wasn't a coach. Like Norv Turner looks like he'd be a high school math teacher if he wasn't a coach. Like Pat Shurmer looks like he would be a substitute high school math teacher. Like Cowher and Gruden and Jimmy look like they'd be media geeks if they weren't coaches. Like Belechik looks like he'd be living in his parents' basement if he wasn't a coach.     

Like any player, the franchise around the coach will determine much of his value.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 1:59 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


In regard to Haslam imo it was merely "There comes a point to where any good decision becomes a bad decision due to what is needed to accomplish it.  There is an initial value but after that any added investment increases more risk of it becoming a bad decision.  This could have come in the form of Money, Power or Kelley's lack of desire to be in Cleveland.  He walked away from both clubs, which makes me think it was the later most likely. 

After watching the the games this week Kelly got his Jones on and balls back.  Philly was the only show that interested him even had we waited it out.  The Eagles being a good fit with Vick, a young talented team and an owner offering anything you like made for the best position to hit the ground winning.  They also have a history of patience in "keeping' a HC even when problems arise for a long time (Do we?)  Enjoying so much success in Oregon and making his first big move winning sooner than later was first and foremost, Philly had us.

Haslam did the right thing by moving on regardless of Kelly changing his mind, he gave his best shot just like Philly.  No one could have counted on Kelly having a change of heart.  Haslam also didn't get the 'love' from Kelly making him think he could just wait it out. You can't make a girl love you no matter what you do sometimes, especially when she finds what she things is a better option.  The only move I care about is the one made.  Time and nothing else will tell the tale.  The outcome might not be want we want but there was nothing wrong with the method used.

My mother never breast-fed me. She told me she liked me as a friend - Rodney Dangerfield
 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 1:59 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 



HeadHole wrote: "Maybe as this being reported too?"

-- This isn't where I heard it, but it says what I was trying to allude to.

To bring it around to a Browns point: So we then have a "new" Kelly in the post-playoff world. Perhaps a significantly new Kelly. A Kelly that Haslam wouldn't have encountered when he talked to him and then hired Chud. So now Philly hires this new Kelly and the fun begins as we see how he and Chud will do down the road. 

But if any of this is true, it does add a twist to any Haslam opinions that are based on his interaction with Kelly. I mean, if you are open to see it.

Again, Kelly looks to me like he'd be a small-town car dealer if he wasn't a coach. Like Norv Turner looks like he'd be a high school math teacher if he wasn't a coach. Like Pat Shurmer looks like he would be a substitute high school math teacher. Like Cowher and Gruden and Jimmy look like they'd be media geeks if they weren't coaches. Like Belechik looks like he'd be living in his parents' basement if he wasn't a coach.     

Like any player, the franchise around the coach will determine much of his value.

Well arguably the difference between good coaches and great coaches are their ability to affect the value of a franchise more than the franchise affects their value.

Andy Reed is a case in point.  Eagles were full of rudderless suck.  He came in as a relative unknown, gave the team an identity, and made the franchise as a whole better.  Sean Payton is another case of a coach coming in, giving a franchise an identity, and making it into something more.   But while it's easy to look back on those hires and say the franchise did right by itself the more likely explanation is that some ****** franchises got lucky with traditional hires and landed a guy who could elevate the franchise from just another place to a real power in the NFL. 

Belichick is the most common example of that but in my mind the pursuit of Belichick - even to the point of giving up high picks for him - showed that the franchise was in great shape and made the hire that brought the coach in line with the franchise.  Other examples like TB hiring Gruden, Jets hiring Parcells, Lakers hiring Phil Jackson, Indians hiring Francona....

Wait.  Where was I.

Right.  Value added.  What the Eagles just did was make a large bet on an unknown who may revolutionize the game or may go Butch Davis or Nick Saban and flame out in spectacular fashion.  What the Browns did was the same as the hundreds of other hires where they took a lesser risk with just as high as a possible reward but not as much of a risk of total flameout.  Whatever you would say about Chud he's been around the NFL for nearly 10 years (TE coach in '04?) so he isn't going to be shocked by the system, the pressure, and the day-to-day grind.   But he may also be as effective here as Norv was in SD. 

Also I disagree with some of your descriptions.  Pat Shurmer is a substitute music teacher.  Jon Gruden works for the TSA at O'Hara.  Belichick appoints himself dictator of the world and smashes all who oppose him. 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 3:19 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


If Kelly is flaky enough to make a major life decision based on watching two football games one weekend, then good riddance.  Sounds like some crap floated out there to provide some cover for Kelly and his new team to me, though. 

As for the Browns, it's really hard to reconcile the way this went down with a super-smart, very much on top of things, get-the-guy-we-target, management team.  Supposedly Banner and Kelly's agent were good friends (which once upon a time was supposed to give us the inside track), yet we still went out to Arizona two or three days early - with much media attention - to prepare to be the first in line to meet the guy after his "big game."  We spent 7 hours with him, which didn't leave us saying "No thanks, not the one for us" at all.  In fact, we arranged for a dinner meeting (reportedly with lawyers and computers and lots of contract language present) to hammer out the final deal. 

Dinner turned into a midnight snack, which turned into breakfast the next morning, which - did that even happen?  Or not?  So we went home.  So, having an inside track with his agent beforehand didn't scare us away.  Meeting with him for 7 hours on Friday didn't scare us away.  But we were the ones who ultimately said "Thanks, but no thanks"?  Does anybody really believe that

1/6/04 Rest in peace "Daddy Wags." May perpetual light shine upon you.

"It's alright to have a hitch in your swing, but when you have a flaw in your hitch, you're in trouble." - Leon Wagner

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 4:47 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


D
Meeting with him for 7 hours on Friday didn't scare us away.  But we were the ones who ultimately said "Thanks, but no thanks"?  Does anybody really believe that?

H
Yes until there is a reason not to.  I would think after 7 LONG hours and no commitment Haslam most likely was feeling like, "Piss on it"(openly or not).  If they stayed at it 12 hours do you think that would have helped?  Who do you think controlled the clock?  Less and many would be bitching for not working hard enough at it.  Do you think Haslam or Kelly called it a day?  You also think Banner being friends with an agent was a deal closer?  The more Kelly got the more he agent gets.  That trumps friendship.  The better his client does with a team the more his agent will make which also trumps friendship.  Philly was ALWAYS the better fit.  Was he friends with Haslam?  Those who gave him input as well?  Kelly has been nothing but wishy washy since the whole process has started period.

He made it CLEAR he wanted to fish elsewhere too.  How was that going to be stopped if it meant a better fit or possible more power and money until he found out?  Maybe he knew we didn't have all he wanted or was finally sure after 7 hours.  we were the perfect warm up team to then know what to ask for in Philly?  Either way, he left both teams right?  Did he give anyone else a shot outside of us and Philly outside of the token conversation in Buffalo?  Imo Philly was the team all the way.  If you are in demand it only makes sense to go to the least likely teams first.  Then you build on what they offer.

My mother never breast-fed me. She told me she liked me as a friend - Rodney Dangerfield
 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:15 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"In regard to Haslam imo it was merely "There comes a point to where any good decision becomes a bad decision due to what is needed to accomplish it.  There is an initial value but after that any added investment increases more risk of it becoming a bad decision."

-- Any hire- or any draft pick- comes with this condition. So I agree this is a factor.

"After watching the the games this week Kelly got his Jones on and balls back."

-- This is a could be. It sounds like he was an on again/off again NFL HC candidate. He may have had demands or issues or conditions or unsureness that may have soured some. In that light, the games he may have seen might have been part of his decision process.

"Haslam did the right thing by moving on regardless of Kelly changing his mind, he gave his best shot just like Philly"

-- I see this again as a could be. I'm glad Kelly aint the HC, but I may be proven wrong. But if Chip changed his bargaining tune after watching things develop, it would of course impact how he once bargained with Haslam and how he bargained with Philly after the weekend. (And Vick isn't Weeden...)

But who knows for sure? Still, a factor that can't be simply ignored if one is trying to honestly judge Haslam's way of doing things.


Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:26 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"Well arguably the difference between good coaches and great coaches are their ability to affect the value of a franchise more than the franchise affects their value."

-- That is an argument. At some point, I'm not sure how you can judge these things accurately. Certainly a HC- in a certain context- can be a game changer. But there is the context once again. Some guys are leaders and some are followers and some get credit that really belongs elsewhere. Brady went down and BB took a life-long back-up and coached the team pretty well. Or Brady went down, a back-up became the starter and the team rose up to play well. Or maybe Brady called all the plays from bed and deserves all the credit for that year?

You're right. Shurmer does look like a music teacher... At this point, I'd settle on Chud "rising" to the level of a Norv Turner for now. 

BTW- A HC in San Diego and now might be an OC in Cleveland? He must love the sport..
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:34 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 



HeadHole wrote: "Well arguably the difference between good coaches and great coaches are their ability to affect the value of a franchise more than the franchise affects their value."

-- That is an argument. At some point, I'm not sure how you can judge these things accurately. Certainly a HC- in a certain context- can be a game changer. But there is the context once again. Some guys are leaders and some are followers and some get credit that really belongs elsewhere. Brady went down and BB took a life-long back-up and coached the team pretty well. Or Brady went down, a back-up became the starter and the team rose up to play well. Or maybe Brady called all the plays from bed and deserves all the credit for that year?

You're right. Shurmer does look like a music teacher... At this point, I'd settle on Chud "rising" to the level of a Norv Turner for now. 

BTW- A HC in San Diego and now might be an OC in Cleveland? He must love the sport..
SD:

I know Norv turner will never be nothing but a fine OC , you know Norv will never pass that platform , and Norv turner knows he ain't got no bidness doing anything but operating  as an OC ,

But as long as some dumb azz owner wants to throw money at him to be their head coach , you can't blame him  for some other fools fantasy.


SoulDawg
WAR : OUR TIME HAS COME
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:35 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


Doesn't seem we are too far apart on most things but don't know what you mean by this

(And Vick isn't Weeden...)

Yer right but are you saying Vick is the lesser of the two for Kelly's system?  I hate Vick as a person for what he did but as a QB he is far better fit at what Kelly likes in a QB imo.  A proven NFL QB more so than ole Weeden.  He excels outside of the pocket.  He is far more mobile than Weeden.  He is more accurate than Weeden and only a few years older.  Vick is the better fit for Kelly.

My mother never breast-fed me. She told me she liked me as a friend - Rodney Dangerfield
 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:39 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"If Kelly is flaky enough to make a major life decision based on watching two football games one weekend, then good riddance.  Sounds like some crap floated out there to provide some cover for Kelly and his new team to me, though."

-- The whole Kap and Wilson thing might be crap. Or it might be one factor of several that played into this whole thing and altered things down the road from any negotiation with Haslam. Or somewhere in between. If one is on the tipping point of a "major life decision", then little things can effect the process.

"As for the Browns, it's really hard to reconcile the way this went down with a super-smart, very much on top of things, get-the-guy-we-target, management team."

-- While how anything "went down" is hard to judge, I would agree that any evaluation of Haslam as an owner is a work in progress. And I can't see his attraction for Banner as the team prez. But there must be something there. (Banner seems like the guy who inherited the dealership that Chip works for- or something like that).

Haslam may turn out to be a stuffed shirt who does a bad job while looking good and saying the right things. Which may at least be somewhat of an improvement for the Browns...)
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:47 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"Doesn't seem we are too far apart on most things but don't know what you mean by this

(And Vick isn't Weeden...)"

-- I was just saying that maybe Vick was part of Kelly's decision to go ahead and take the Philly job. He might be a good fit for Kelly's plans. 

So once again we might not be too far apart?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 5:52 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


"But as long as some dumb azz owner wants to throw money at him to be their head coach , you can't blame him  for some other fools fantasy."

-- I can agree with that. Hopefully at some point Turner will get burnt or smart enough to say no thanks to rich fools who come knocking. The fans will ultimately thank him for that. But his greed or dreams of success may get in the way.

I would love to have him as an OC in Cleveland...
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 6:05 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 



hamster wrote: D
Meeting with him for 7 hours on Friday didn't scare us away.  But we were the ones who ultimately said "Thanks, but no thanks"?  Does anybody really believe that?

H
Yes until there is a reason not to.  I would think after 7 LONG hours and no commitment Haslam most likely was feeling like, "Piss on it"(openly or not). 

Then why didn't they leave then?  Would you stick around for two more days if you were an uber-owner, get-who-you-want and don't take no for an answer, type?  Heck, why go through the charade of setting up a dinner meeting with lawyers?

If they stayed at it 12 hours do you think that would have helped?

No.  And I don't know why you would think I would.

Who do you think controlled the clock? 

Well, who cares?  But it's pretty apparent that Chip Kelly controlled the clock at dinner time on Saturday. 

Less and many would be bitching for not working hard enough at it.  Do you think Haslam or Kelly called it a day?

Again, who cares?  Does this matter?  If so, why?

You also think Banner being friends with an agent was a deal closer? 

No, but it should have let us get some inside information on the likelihood that we were just wasting our time going through the charade.

 Philly was ALWAYS the better fit.

That's the nub of the issue.  And if you knew that why didn't our super-owner Jimmy "trey" and his sidekick (who is friends with Kelly's agent) know it, too?  Or did they?

He made it CLEAR he wanted to fish elsewhere too.  How was that going to be stopped if it meant a better fit or possible more power and money until he found out?

No problem with any of that.  Just sayin' it doesn't comport with anyone suggesting that Jimmy Haslam "always gets his man."  

Imo Philly was the team all the way.

Again.  If you knew this then Haslam and Banner should have, too.  Maybe they did and decided to take a flyer anyway.  But after 7 hours meeting with they guy they sure as heck should have known there was no point in waiting around for two days hoping for a promised "dinner meeting" that never happened.  

If you are in demand it only makes sense to go to the least likely teams first.

And that describes us to a "tee."  

Look, I'm not saying this isn't "business as usual" for the Cleveland Browns TNG.  It is.  What I'm trying to say is that Jimmy Haslam hasn't changed that a bit - despite all the talk here and elsewhere about how he's changed everything, will always "get his man" and "won't take no for an answer."  If nothing else, we know now that Haslam hasn't changed everything, he doesn't always get his man, and he does sometimes take no for an answer. 

1/6/04 Rest in peace "Daddy Wags." May perpetual light shine upon you.

"It's alright to have a hitch in your swing, but when you have a flaw in your hitch, you're in trouble." - Leon Wagner

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/17/2013 6:09 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 



daddywags wrote:

If Kelly is flaky enough to make a major life decision based on watching two football games one weekend, then good riddance.  Sounds like some crap floated out there to provide some cover for Kelly and his new team to me, though. 

As for the Browns, it's really hard to reconcile the way this went down with a super-smart, very much on top of things, get-the-guy-we-target, management team.  Supposedly Banner and Kelly's agent were good friends (which once upon a time was supposed to give us the inside track), yet we still went out to Arizona two or three days early - with much media attention - to prepare to be the first in line to meet the guy after his "big game."  We spent 7 hours with him, which didn't leave us saying "No thanks, not the one for us" at all.  In fact, we arranged for a dinner meeting (reportedly with lawyers and computers and lots of contract language present) to hammer out the final deal. 

Dinner turned into a midnight snack, which turned into breakfast the next morning, which - did that even happen?  Or not?  So we went home.  So, having an inside track with his agent beforehand didn't scare us away.  Meeting with him for 7 hours on Friday didn't scare us away.  But we were the ones who ultimately said "Thanks, but no thanks"?  Does anybody really believe that

There is no way to reconcile it.  Haslam wanted him, Kelly wasn't interested. Haslam didn't get the job done. Lurie did. All the rest is putting lipstick on a pig.

Well see if the Browns fall on the 70 side of the 30-70 odds of a rookie coach making it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/17/2013 8:03 PM

Re: Chip Kelly 


" If nothing else, we know now that Haslam hasn't changed everything, he doesn't always get his man, and he does sometimes take no for an answer."

-- Well, yes and no.

We do know that Haslam "doesn't always get his man, and he does sometimes take no for an answer." If there was a question about that. I would think this is part of the business world. It could be argued that this can be part of a new owner's learning curve. Whatever.

What counts is the Browns record ultimately under his ownership. Chip or Chud are just tools to get there.

So maybe Haslam will prove to change the Brown's record. A record that didn't do real well in the Lerner Legacy. 


What the process we just saw can give us are data points about what he wanted, what he did and how he reacted. The later record of person's involved will be further data points. 

Any actual facts are relevant in building the context in which events occurred. But really, hiring the HC is part of getting the franchise set up and what now happens. I don't see how any of these events currently give much currency to Haslam haters or Haslam fans. Both of which can be foolish and tiring.

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >