Jump to content


Photo

Head Coaches Since 1999


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 WarrenDawg

WarrenDawg

    College Letter of Intent

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Cincinnati

Posted 22 October 2010 - 02:48 PM

Before calling for Mangini’s head, take a minute to think about Browns head coaches since 1999. I think things were much worse with past head coaches…

Chris Palmer, 5-27 overall, 3-17 in division, no winning seasons, no playoffs

Butch Davis, 24-35 overall, 12-16 in division, 1 winning season, 1 playoff appearance

Terry Robiskie, 1-4 overall, finished out 2004 season for Butch Davis

Romeo Crennel, 24-40 overall, 5-19 in division, 1 winning season, no playoffs

Eric Mangini, 6-17 overall, 2-7 in division, no winning seasons, no playoffs

Notes:
Chris Palmer had a pretty bad expansion team, but managed to win 50% of games against the Steelers.
Butch Davis had the best overall winning percentage and the most success in the division.
Crennel won 10 games in 2007 and looked like things were turning around until a complete collapse in 2008.

I know patience is wearing thin, but I think the jury is still out on Mangini. I want to believe that the team is finally being built the proper way.
Of course, the front office and O & D coordinators contribute to the success & failure of head coaches. One thing is for certain… Regime changes cause instability to the team. Successful teams don’t change key personnel every three years!

Which makes me want to ask: Who do you think was the worst head coach since the Browns return? Is Mangini the best of the worst? Is history just repeating itself?
  • 0

#2 Gips

Gips

    MVP

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,409 posts

Posted 22 October 2010 - 03:32 PM

You left out the fact that none of the other browns coaches had been an nfl head coach for 3 years before being fired and picked up by lerner shortly after, patience is thin and the wins even thinner, even though most didnt expect much we did expect somewhat more offensive fireworks, rather by ground or air than dabs has provided as a minion of mangini's linear offense, daboll really needs to be replaced so we can see if mangini can accept the fact he sucks as an offensive mind and he needs to then fook off of the offense and let the new OC run things, including who does what and when without the strangulating/confining kiddy time practice special of the week garbage and if he wont or cant do that then he should be shown the door..

I dont care for the coach or his offensive philosophy much, but I dont think he is going anywhere just yet and i would still like to see him become creative, less conservative and try to turn things around like he actually has a set of nads instead of a mangina because honestly most of the coaches currently available are only slighty better or even slighty worse than mangini, even though any of them are likely far more creative and flexible and not afraid to take some chances with a 1-5 team...

Mangini is still our coach until heckert and or holmgren announce differently and i still root for him to man up and find a way to truly compete, even with all the injuries it is still possible but he has to step outside his rigid little bubble first...
  • 0

#3 Earl34

Earl34

    Pro Veteran

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts

Posted 22 October 2010 - 03:42 PM

Thanks for summarizing WarrenDawg but I don't think Eric Mangini's success or failure THIS year (and hence his return or firing) is going to hinge on wins and losses. I don't think Holmgren and Heckert are that dumb or shortsighted. Whatever the criteria are to determine success, I imagine some of it may have to do with how competitive the team is and how hard they've played for Mangini (which you cannot argue that they aren't playing hard). My suspicion is that if Holmgren WAS interested in determining Mangini's future by virtue of wins and losses only....then there would be more grumblings about how he's on the hot seat.

DOES IT STRIKE ANYONE AS ODD THAT WHILE THE WORLD IS CRYING OVER SINGLETARY AND ALREADY TALKING ABOUT THE NEXT COWBOYS' COACH THAT WE DON'T HEAR MORE ABOUT MANGINI BEING ON THE HOT SEAT?! That's because I don't think he is....at least not in the conventional way.

I think it's too soon to say where Mangini ranks on that list.
  • 0

#4 next2nothing

next2nothing

    Pro Rookie

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 765 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 October 2010 - 09:33 PM

QUOTE (Earl34 @ Oct 22 2010, 04:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Thanks for summarizing WarrenDawg but I don't think Eric Mangini's success or failure THIS year (and hence his return or firing) is going to hinge on wins and losses. I don't think Holmgren and Heckert are that dumb or shortsighted. Whatever the criteria are to determine success, I imagine some of it may have to do with how competitive the team is and how hard they've played for Mangini (which you cannot argue that they aren't playing hard). My suspicion is that if Holmgren WAS interested in determining Mangini's future by virtue of wins and losses only....then there would be more grumblings about how he's on the hot seat.

DOES IT STRIKE ANYONE AS ODD THAT WHILE THE WORLD IS CRYING OVER SINGLETARY AND ALREADY TALKING ABOUT THE NEXT COWBOYS' COACH THAT WE DON'T HEAR MORE ABOUT MANGINI BEING ON THE HOT SEAT?! That's because I don't think he is....at least not in the conventional way.

I think it's too soon to say where Mangini ranks on that list.

Agreed. I don't think he's even sniffing the hot seat, let alone on it. Holmgren, based on his time in Seattle, knows that winning teams aren't built in one or two seasons.
  • 0

#5 Steeler SChick

Steeler SChick

    College All American

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPip
  • 477 posts

Posted 22 October 2010 - 10:39 PM

There's a direct correlation between stains HC's and starting QB's.

2010 Jake Delhomme (1) / Seneca Wallace (4) / Colt McCoy (1)
2009 Brady Quinn (9) / Derek Anderson (7)
2008 Derek Anderson (9) / Brady Quinn (3) / Ken Dorsey (3) / Bruce Gradkowski (1)
2007 Charlie Frye (1) / Derek Anderson (15)
2006 Charlie Frye (13) / Derek Anderson (3)
2005 Trent Dilfer (11) / Charlie Frye (5)
2004 Jeff Garcia (10) / Kelly Holcomb (2) / Luke McCown (4)
2003 Kelly Holcomb (8) / Tim Couch (8)
2002 Tim Couch (14) / Kelly Holcomb (2)
2001 Tim Couch (16)
2000 Tim Couch (7) / Doug Pederson (8) / Spergon Wynn (1)
1999 Ty Detmer (2) / Tim Couch (14)

Regards...




... an'at




.
  • 0

#6 NW Ohio Brownie

NW Ohio Brownie

    College All American

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPip
  • 338 posts

Posted 23 October 2010 - 07:19 AM

SChuck,

That's a good point. No question that's been a huge determiner, if not the biggest.

Look, Mangini needed help from Heckert in the draft. He got it on both sides of the ball. Unfortunately, the offensive help (Hardesty, Lauvao) haven't stayed healthy. If they had, they would have started from the get-go. That's pretty clear based on Harrison's lack of production and the shuffling on the right side of the line. If you're counting, that's four starters from the draft and I'm not even counting McCoy. Haden and Ward are very good players already and are only going to get better. Add Lauvao and Hardesty back into the mix next year and that's a good start for Heckert.

I'm as tired of losing as everyone else, but I'm not going to lose my grip on reality along the way. In order for the Browns to win consistently, they are going to have to add as many starters in next year's draft, and the next year's draft, and so on. And along the way, they MUST get the QB of the future. We need help at WR, DL, and S in next year's draft. If McCoy doesn't show that he could be the guy over the next few weeks, I think the Browns have to take a hard look at Luck, Ponder, and Mallett, because this is the best crop of pro-potential QBs in quite some time.

So it boils down to two things: 1) SChuck's point about the lack of consistent, talented QB & 2) Piss-poor drafting for nine years out of 11 (2007 & 2010 being the exceptions)
  • 0

#7 Earl34

Earl34

    Pro Veteran

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts

Posted 23 October 2010 - 07:31 AM

As annoying as I find Steeler SChick's avatar and sig.....I am going to have to point out that there is a kernel of truth in the above.

The NFL is a QB driven league. If you don't have a QB you cannot consistently win.

Let's look at Eric Mangini's record in NY. In 2006, he had a healthy Chad Pennington. The Jets went 10-6 and made the playoffs. In 2007, he had an injured Pennington and then an unproven Clemens. They went 4-12. In 2008, before Favre's injury, they were 8-3. After Favre's injury they went 1-4. That's 18-9 with stability at QB and 5-16 without decent QB play.

The fact that the Browns were able to win five games last year with a 60 rated passer (#10) and a 42-rated passer (#3) is beyond amazing.

Now let's look at the 4 or 5 win teams in the NFL so far this year....

New York Jets- Mark Sanchez hadn't turned the ball over until last week
New England- Tom Brady is Tom Brady
Pittsburgh Steelers- As much as anyone on here hates to admit it the QB play while Ben was gone wasn't terrible and they were able to run the ball
Baltimore Ravens- Joe Flacco
Tennessee- Vince Young (98.8 pass rating)
Houston - Matt Schaub
Indianapolis - Peyton Manning
Giants - Eli Manning
Philadelphia - MIke Vick/Kevin Kolb (#1 & #7 in passer rating)
Chicago - Jay Cutler until he gets killed and they aren't 4-2 any more
Atlanta- Matt Ryan
New Orleans - Drew Brees

The only point here is that having a high-achieving QB doesn't guarantee winning (See Romo and Rodgers) but it's quite difficult to win without one.
  • 0

#8 Bob806

Bob806

    Pro Veteran

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berea, Oh
  • Interests:All Cleveland sports teams, Ohio State sports, bowling, golf, & camping.

Posted 23 October 2010 - 09:58 AM

QUOTE (WarrenDawg @ Oct 22 2010, 03:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Butch Davis, 24-35 overall, 12-16 in division, 1 winning season, 1 playoff appearance


Notes:
Chris Palmer had a pretty bad expansion team, but managed to win 50% of games against the Steelers.
Butch Davis had the best overall winning percentage and the most success in the division.
Crennel won 10 games in 2007 and looked like things were turning around until a complete collapse in 2008.

Which makes me want to ask: Who do you think was the worst head coach since the Browns return? Is Mangini the best of the worst? Is history just repeating itself?


My opinion, Butch Davis was the worst of the bunch. I know we made the playoffs with him, but his personnel moves set us back, and Romeo couldn't dig us out.

Is Mangini the best of the worst? Time will tell, it's still early. I do wish he would dump Daboll and get a better OC.
  • 0

#9 Earl34

Earl34

    Pro Veteran

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts

Posted 23 October 2010 - 11:04 AM

QUOTE (Bob806 @ Oct 23 2010, 10:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My opinion, Butch Davis was the worst of the bunch. I know we made the playoffs with him, but his personnel moves set us back, and Romeo couldn't dig us out.

Is Mangini the best of the worst? Time will tell, it's still early. I do wish he would dump Daboll and get a better OC.


Bob, I have heard more than a few talking heads praising Daboll the last two weeks. Can you imagine how tough it is to plan and call a game against the Steelers with a rookie QB?
  • 0

#10 Bob806

Bob806

    Pro Veteran

  • REGISTERED
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berea, Oh
  • Interests:All Cleveland sports teams, Ohio State sports, bowling, golf, & camping.

Posted 23 October 2010 - 11:25 AM

QUOTE (Earl34 @ Oct 23 2010, 12:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Bob, I have heard more than a few talking heads praising Daboll the last two weeks. Can you imagine how tough it is to plan and call a game against the Steelers with a rookie QB?


I hear you, and I know we are short on WR talent, but we still look too conservative.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users