Browns to interview McCarthy

[Gunz41]

55 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

Could a Dungy or Cowher ever be lured out of the TV booth after many years, ala  Gruden?  Not likely, but you never know. (and it would not be done by Jimmy Haslam)

According to Wikipedia, Don Shula won the 1968 NFL championship with the Colts, and 72 and 73 seasons were Super Bowls (technically 73 and 74 SB champion).

As for you responding, I NEVER claimed he won SUPER BOWLS with 2 teams. It was never stated he won an "ultimate title", but since this was pre merger, he did win a championship of the NFL in 68

[The Gipper]

15 minutes ago, SD_Tom said:

Not sure why people are so dead set against MM. God forbid we get an experienced and successful coach. He's won a SB,  coached 2 great QB'S,  and he's looking to prove he's still a top coach. 

Beggars can't be choosers.  Let's at least get a coach who can put together a string of at least one winning season in a row.

 

 

I am not dead set against anyone.......except the guy that comes in and proves he can't handle the job.   So, I am dead set against Freddie Kitchens, Hue Jackson, Pat Shurmur, Romeo Crennell...and maybe a few others. 

To my knowledge none of them are being interviewed, thank goodness.  

And, you know, to be honest...I am not even dead set against  Mike Pettine,  Eric Mangini, Butch Davis.    They could, perhaps have been better coaches with better support. 

Maybe we should make a list of:   Which GMs would we be dead set against? 

[The Gipper]

2 minutes ago, Gunz41 said:

According to Wikipedia, Don Shula won the 1968 NFL championship with the Colts, and 72 and 73 seasons were Super Bowls (technically 73 and 74 SB champion).

As for you responding, I NEVER claimed he won SUPER BOWLS with 2 teams. It was never stated he won an "ultimate title", but since this was pre merger, he did win a championship of the NFL in 68

Well.....OK, so in your view, every coach that has won a Conference Championship game...which the NFL championship was tantamount those years from 66 to 69,   but lost the Super Bowl has still "won a championship"? 

[Tour2ma]

12 hours ago, Neo said:

Whether you like it or not, he IS the best candidate AVAILABLE.

You can state your opinion as fact all day long, but that does not mean that I have to agree.

6 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

So you would have passed on Andy Reid too. 

Good question and I honestly don't have an answer. I don't recall having strong feelings either way and a search shows I did not. http://thebrownsboard.com/search/?&q=reid&type=forums_topic&page=2&author=Tour2ma&nodes=2&search_and_or=or&sortby=relevancy

Whle I thought Andy would be our next HC after Shumur and Holngren were sent packing, but I never was sure how I felt about that possibility.

Why neutral on Andy, but not Mike? Best I can offer is memories of their pressers where Andy always came across as a confident human and McCarthy consistently came across as a prick.

[Neo]

2 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

You can state your opinion as fact all day long, but that does not mean that I have to agree.

It is a fact and you don't have to agree, that's the beauty of being an American. McCarthy may not be my first option, but he IS the best available candidate and somebody I would trust for the next five years to right the ship. I just find it amusing that there are some Browns fans out there that still won't give the man a chance even though he probably has more wins and less losses than all our previous coaches since 1999 combined. I am going to go out on a limb and say McCarthy can't be much worse than Hue Jackson or Freddie Kitchens.

[Tour2ma]

55 minutes ago, Neo said:

It is a fact and you don't have to agree...

Facts are indisputable and therefore not subject to agreement... worldwide. Whereas your opinion... not so much.

For an example in addition to the above...

57 minutes ago, Neo said:

... somebody I would trust for the next five years...

Pure opinion... as is my disagreement.

[mjp28]

12 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

Facts are indisputable and therefore not subject to agreement... worldwide. Whereas your opinion... not so much.

For an example in addition to the above...

Pure opinion... as is my disagreement.

Just like Neo is exactly like Nero except for the extra r ....... which is my pure opinion.....I think.  

[SdBacker80]

The life of a HC You either retire or You get fired.

On one hand MM made it 13 years.  On the other hand he had Rodgers running the offense.

Eric B is another interesting interview option.  On one hand he’s directed a great offense on the other hand his guys aren’t coming with him. The plus is his unknown potential.  The negative his unknown potential.

the Browns over the years seem to be more intrigued by unknown potential of these peaking coordinators.  
 

Im opinion less this go around.  Well not totally I don’t want Josh McDaniel and to a lesser extent I don’t want Urban.  Anyone else I won’t be disappointed. 

[SdBacker80]

3 hours ago, The Gipper said:

I am not dead set against anyone.......except the guy that comes in and proves he can't handle the job.   So, I am dead set against Freddie Kitchens, Hue Jackson, Pat Shurmur, Romeo Crennell...and maybe a few others. 

To my knowledge none of them are being interviewed, thank goodness.  

And, you know, to be honest...I am not even dead set against  Mike Pettine,  Eric Mangini, Butch Davis.    They could, perhaps have been better coaches with better support. 

Maybe we should make a list of:   Which GMs would we be dead set against? 

The GM selection will be interesting.

Who wants it should be asked?

the HC is Already selected and the GM reports AGAINST the HC when the surefire trouble starts.  Points to someone new with few options .

[Westside Steve]

Wasn't there some sort of statement supposedly coming today at 2?

 

[mjp28]

10 minutes ago, SdBacker80 said:

The life of a HC You either retire or You get fired.

I think all coaches know this going in especially lately but one of my all time favorites in saying that and other things was the old Oilers coach Bum Phillips.

- There's two kinds of coaches, them that's fired and them that's gonna be fired.

- You don't know a ladder has splinters until you slide down it.

- Dallas Cowboys may be America's team, but the Houston Oilers are Texas' team.

- Rogers sees daylight. Campbell makes daylight.

 

 

 

[Gunz41]

4 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Well.....OK, so in your view, every coach that has won a Conference Championship game...which the NFL championship was tantamount those years from 66 to 69,   but lost the Super Bowl has still "won a championship"? 

Nope, not all all. Semantics my friend. In hindsight sure its like a conference championship, but since they were 2 separate leagues at the time they were champions.

It's the same argument that many (including you) have used to count the number of championships the Browns have in comparison to others. 

Again, if I had used the words: World champion, ultimate champion, SB champion, etc then I would be wrong. 

[Gunz41]

1 hour ago, Neo said:

It is a fact and you don't have to agree, that's the beauty of being an American. McCarthy may not be my first option, but he IS the best available candidate and somebody I would trust for the next five years to right the ship. I just find it amusing that there are some Browns fans out there that still won't give the man a chance even though he probably has more wins and less losses than all our previous coaches since 1999 combined. I am going to go out on a limb and say McCarthy can't be much worse than Hue Jackson or Freddie Kitchens.

It is not a FACT that MM is the BEST candidate available. What you seem to be using as "best" is more so most accomplished. 

If MM were factually the BEST candidate then every team would be in a bidding war for him. Best and most accomplished are different things.

That doesn't mean that MM can't be both, but stating it as a FACT is incorrect. 

[Neo]

The Browns approach to finding a HC has always been throw something at the wall and see what sticks except NOTHING EVER STICKS. Just look at the list of candidates Eric Bienimy, Greg Roman, Robert Saleh, all the same see what sticks type of candidates.

Not saying one of these guys can't be an instant phenom, but the odds are HIGHLY unlikely. McCarthy can bring stability, which is the first step of changing the culture. If they gave Hueless two years, they would have to give McCarthy at least three years minimum. 

[Neo]

2 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Facts are indisputable and therefore not subject to agreement... worldwide. Whereas your opinion... not so much.

For an example in addition to the above...

Pure opinion... as is my disagreement.

You know,  it really doesn't matter what I or anybody thinks because the Browns will do what they always do and we'll be talking about this again next year. Well, you'll be talking about this. As I said, wake me when the nightmare ends.

[WarriorsRpussies]

I've actually coming around to the idea of McCarthy being the head coach. Saw his interview and it appears the year off has made him thirsty to coach again. Even if half of the stuff that was leaked after he was fired is true, he was basically coasting the last couple of years and expecting Aaron to bail him out. I liked most of his answers and physically it look like he lost some weight instead of somefat fuck that gets massages in his office. He would bring instant credibility and embrace analytics. 

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

Nope, not all all. Semantics my friend. In hindsight sure its like a conference championship, but since they were 2 separate leagues at the time they were champions.

It's the same argument that many (including you) have used to count the number of championships the Browns have in comparison to others.

Not at all....Where I count the Browns having won championships...they won and didn't lose.  They didn't have another game to play.   Shula did...and he lost.   

Again, if I had used the words: World champion, ultimate champion, SB champion, etc then I would be wrong. 

You used the word  "championship".....And by that definition then there are 54 AFC or NFC Championship game winners who did not win the World Championship, SB Championship etc. that are still called "Championship game winners".    So, I say you cannot include Shula any more than you can include  Bill Parcells or John Fox or Dan Reeves or Dick Vermeil, etc. etc.  anyone that won a Super Bowl with one team and then won a Conference Championship with another. 

 

 

[Gunz41]

37 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

 

That is your rule then. As a quick search will generate NFL CHAMPION. 

But it's ok for you to change up the rules to fit your agenda. 

Again, since you want to continue to argue this, go back to my original post and show me one thing that I was incorrect about? Don Shula IS recognized as the NFL CHAMPION that year. Nobody ever said SB, Ultimate champion, won last game, etc. And since there was no AFC/NFC there is no way to say that is what the Colts won. In Hindsight yes that is what the equivalent would appear to be, but the Colts went down as NFL CHAMPIONS 

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

That is your rule then. As a quick search will generate NFL CHAMPION. 

But it's ok for you to change up the rules to fit your agenda. 

Again, since you want to continue to argue this, go back to my original post and show me one thing that I was incorrect about? Don Shula IS recognized as the NFL CHAMPION that year. Nobody ever said SB, Ultimate champion, won last game, etc. And since there was no AFC/NFC there is no way to say that is what the Colts won. In Hindsight yes that is what the equivalent would appear to be, but the Colts went down as NFL CHAMPIONS 

No one recognizes that has a championship. He lost.  He lost the Super Bowl. So you gonna tell me the Minnesota Vikings want to championship and that the Raiders and the Chiefs won the championships only despite the fact they got pounded by the Packers in the supers two Super Bowl‘s.  In that way you’re thinking every Super Bowl loser is a champion

[Icecube]

 

[Icecube]

 

[The Gipper]

6 minutes ago, Icecube said:

 

Stupid. How could anyone be anything with Freddie kitchens as their coach. 

[Dutch Oven]

1 minute ago, The Gipper said:

Stupid. How could anyone be anything with Freddie kitchens as their coach. 

You can keep thinking that Kitchens was completely to blame for Mayfield regressing this season, but you'd be wrong. 

 

[The Gipper]

33 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

You can keep thinking that Kitchens was completely to blame for Mayfield regressing this season, but you'd be wrong. 

 

98%

[Gunz41]

9 hours ago, The Gipper said:

No one recognizes that has a championship. He lost.  He lost the Super Bowl. So you gonna tell me the Minnesota Vikings want to championship and that the Raiders and the Chiefs won the championships only despite the fact they got pounded by the Packers in the supers two Super Bowl‘s.  In that way you’re thinking every Super Bowl loser is a champion

I'm not going to post anymore on the topic pal. Think whatever it is you want. All you have to do to see how history records them is do a quick search on NFL champions. 

The last I will say is that you have tried different things to prove your point, which NOBODY disagreed with. You keep bringing up SB, Ultimate game, lost last game, AFC/NFC etc. Things that NOBODY said. All I asked was show me one thing that I posted that was incorrect, yet all you are doing is bringing up the same thing that nobody is contradicting. 

There is NO grey area in the record books. The Colts were, are, and will always be the 1968 NFL CHAMPIONS. 

[jrb12711]

I’m fine with Mike. I’m so weary to this process that the only thing I want for sure is a coach who’s done this shit for a while at least at a coordinator level. I’m glad real a guy like Rhule didn’t want to interview. He may be the next great guy, but the Browns don’t need that.

We need someone who can come in and knows how to set the tone. Mike easily could do that.

[MDDawg]

11 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

You can keep thinking that Kitchens was completely to blame for Mayfield regressing this season, but you'd be wrong. 

 

Kitchens was mostly to blame by designing poor gameplans and lack of attention to detail, Dorsey as well by blacklisting Higgins, cutting Fells, trading Zeitler and firing Zampese. Baker admits he didn't train hard in the offseason but that reflects on the culture Dorsey set in the building where he crowned Baker's a** before he'd really achieved anything.

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Gunz41 said:

I'm not going to post anymore on the topic pal. Think whatever it is you want. All you have to do to see how history records them is do a quick search on NFL champions. 

The last I will say is that you have tried different things to prove your point, which NOBODY disagreed with. You keep bringing up SB, Ultimate game, lost last game, AFC/NFC etc. Things that NOBODY said. All I asked was show me one thing that I posted that was incorrect, yet all you are doing is bringing up the same thing that nobody is contradicting. 

There is NO grey area in the record books. The Colts were, are, and will always be the 1968 NFL CHAMPIONS. 

No grey area in the record books.   Colts were 1968 NFL champions and they are no more than the 51 Super Bowl other Super Bowl losers since then.  NFC/AFC champions. Or even any more than say last year the Ravens were the AFC North Champions. 

Maybe you also want to call all the "Division Championship" winners"Champions  since then as well.  They do call them Champions.

The better question is:   Why do we call any team that did not win the Super Bowl "Champions"  if they have simply won their won a step on the way to the right to get the "ultimate" championship game? Division champions?    We need better terminology.

[Dutch Oven]

2 minutes ago, MDDawg said:

Kitchens was mostly to blame by designing poor gameplans and lack of attention to detail, Dorsey as well by blacklisting Higgins, cutting Fells, trading Zeitler and firing Zampese. Baker admits he didn't train hard in the offseason but that reflects on the culture Dorsey set in the building where he crowned Baker's a** before he'd really achieved anything.

You (hell all of us Browns fans) better hope you are right.

Because if you are not, Baker Mayfield was vastly overrated. 

[MDDawg]

7 minutes ago, Dutch Oven said:

You (hell all of us Browns fans) better hope you are right.

Because if you are not, Baker Mayfield was vastly overrated. 

Admittedly my doubts were creeping in about Baker this season but when I read about how Bienimy prepares Mahomes for games ( I linked it in the HC/GM thread) which obviously lacked here I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Not endorsing Bienimy but I want someone like him who pays attention to detail and coaches his players hard.