Posted: 1/17/2013 11:18 AM
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.
Posted: 1/17/2013 12:18 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 12:26 PM
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
Posted: 1/17/2013 1:13 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 1:59 PM
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.
Posted: 1/17/2013 3:19 PM
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
Posted: 1/17/2013 4:47 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:15 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:26 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:34 PM
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..
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:35 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:39 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:47 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 5:52 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 6:05 PM
hamster wrote: DMeeting 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?HYes 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.
Posted: 1/17/2013 6:09 PM
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?
Posted: 1/17/2013 8:03 PM
Posted: 1/17/2013 8:37 PM
I'm with you until the last graph: >>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.<<What we are talking about are actual facts. And how they fit don't necessarily result in "Haslam haters or Haslam fans." Dropping people into those buckets isn't terribly useful, IMhO. Of course how well the team performs is all that matters. But they aren't going to play an actual game that counts until next September. I'm pretty sure we'll want to have stuff to talk about between now and then. No?
Posted: 1/17/2013 9:04 PM
Chud is my Bud
Copyright © 2013
and Scout.com. All rights reserved. This website is an unofficial independent source of news and information, and is not affiliated with any school, team, or league.
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2012 Microsoft|