QUOTE: “The difference between perseverance and obstinacy is that one comes from a strong will, and the other from a strong won’t.” -- Henry Ward Beecher
Monday night, America got a chance to see the Cleveland Browns, and it wasn’t pretty (I bet the remotes were in full force in many households). I’m not sure where to begin, or even if I should begin at all, but one thing that must be very clear to owner Randy Lerner after that debacle is that Eric “The Secret” Mangini has lost the confidence of the fans — locally and now nationally. Bad teams are often never really as bad as they seem, and good teams are never as good, but in the case of the Brownies, especially on offense, “bad” is the appropriate adjective.
The Browns are so bad on offense, from scheme to design to execution to talent, that it’s difficult to know where to start the overhaul. Imagine two years ago when the Browns were actually an effective offensive team. They ranked eighth in scoring and even scored 51 points in one game, but those days seem long ago. Back then, they had so many skill players that the only criticism of their offense might have been that they didn’t get the ball to Joshua Cribbs more often. Now Cribbs is their only playmaker, and if he doesn’t score a touchdown, the Browns don’t score.
My question for Browns fans is this: If Lerner thought Mangini was the answer, how can he be expected to find someone to fix a problem that has magnified since Mangini arrived on the shores of Lake Erie? The answer is he can’t. There’s an old saying in the league that applies to Lerner: He does not know that he does not know. What he’ll do is buy a name, someone who comes with a certain cache that will build confidence with his fan base. It will be hard to find that person as an executive but not as hard to find a proven coach who can restructure this organization. With five Super Bowl coaches out of work, it can’t be hard for Lerner to make a list. Jon “Love You Bro” Gruden supposedly loves ESPN right now, but unless they have his signature on a contract that prevents him from going back to college or the pros, it’s meaningless.
Not just based on last night’s 16-0 loss to the Ravens but on his time as a head coach, Mangini is the obstacle keeping Lerner from turning around this team. The sooner he accepts this, the sooner he can begin -- assuming he hires the right person.
Last word on the call...
I’ve gotten a ton of emails saying there’s a double standard between my critique of Bill Belichick’s game management on Sunday and Eagles coach Andy Reid. The attacks -- some kind, some not so kind – claim that if Reid had done this, I’d be going nuts. Not true, and here’s why:
1. Reid usually makes mistakes on coaching challenges and when to throw his red flag, which always cost him timeouts. Too many to list.
2. He also makes mistakes on calling timeouts that can prevent a team from passing. Like the timeout at 2:02 in the Raiders game.
3. He makes mistakes throwing the ball at the end of the half, without regard to allowing his opponent to have another opportunity with ball (see Cincinnati game in 2008).
4. His record in games decided by seven points or less is 1-8-1.
5. He doesn’t have three Super Bowl trophies.
Never do I engage in ripping Reid for his run/pass ratios, as most of the media does in Philadelphia. I actually agree with the philosophy that you must throw the ball to score in this league. Had Reid made this call, I would have ripped him for his use of timeouts, but not for trying to keep the ball away from Peyton Manning. Reid’s ability to manage the game and Belichick’s ability during their time as head coaches is indisputable.
I wrote Monday that the wasting of timeouts was a bigger problem than the call and was very un-Patriot-like. In fact, I’m sure Belichick is disappointed in his use of timeouts, and I’m sure he’ll try to not let that happen again.
But understand this -- and this is my final say on the matter -- there is history between these two teams, and it was because of that history that this call was made. In the 2006 AFC Championship game, the Patriots were in front 34-31. The series before, they had just forced Manning into a three-and-out and had the ball at their own 40-yard line. Here is the breakdown:
New England Patriots at 3:22
1-10-NE 40 (3:22) PENALTY on NE-H.Evans, Offensive 12 On-field, 5 yards, enforced at NE 40 - No Play.
1-15-NE 35 (3:22) T.Brady pass short right to R.Caldwell to NE 42 for 7 yards (M.Jackson).
2-8-NE 42 (2:39) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to B.Watson to NE 46 for 4 yards (A.Bethea, J.David).
Timeout #2 by IND at 02:30.
3-4-NE 46 (2:30) (Shotgun) T.Brady pass incomplete short right to T.Brown (B.Sanders).
4-4-NE 46 (2:27) T.Sauerbrun punts 54 yards to end zone, Center-L.Paxton, Touchback.
As we all know, Manning and the Colts then drove 80 yards to the winning touchdown, which led them to the Super Bowl title. I know the Patriots thought about going for that fourth-and-4 but decided to manage the game conventionally, based on their defensive outing the series before. Conventional thinking doesn’t work, and field position doesn’t matter when talking about Peyton Manning and his offense.
Those are my last words on the subject.
Follow me on Twitter: michaelombardi
The offense in Cleveland is just putrid...there is no WR running routes longer than 10 yards. I was stunned by the team demeanor: the game was tied but in the sidelines they were lifeless, and even more after falling down in the score. The defense seems to put some effort, but there is nothing else beside of Cribbs (our prayers to him). In only nine games Mangini has the fanbase longing for Romeo Crennel days...
The Eagles have only been in 10 games decided by 7 points or less during the Andy Reid era?
Interesting reading all the comments vis BB and 4th and 2. Go or no go. Let us all hop into the Wayback machine to January 2004. NFC divisional playoff, Packers v Eagles. Late 4th Q Packers had a 4th and 1. Make it and you win the game since the Eagles have no timeouts remaining. Sherman did the safe and conventional thing and punted even though the Packers o line owned the Eagles at that stage of the game. Although the defense forced the Eagles to a 4th and 26, the Packers still managed to lose the game when the Eagles converted, tied the game and Favre threw the interception in OT. My point-obviously with a 4th down play late in the game you are damned if you do, damned if you don't. If either the Pats or Packers made it, the coach is a hero; don't, well just read the posts.
Pats are 0-1 in Super Bowl's where they didn't video tape the opponents offensive signals and decode them. The Pats knew what Eagles Plays were coming and they STILL only beat the Eagles by 3 points in the Super Bowl.
Martz handed the first Super Bowl to the Pats with his throw/throw/throw offense. Belichick is a great coach, but he won 3 Super Bowl's by very tight margins, with some sketchy tactics. With a little "bad luck" he's Marv Levy.
bellicheck without brady is just another coach....look at last year...same team...easiest schedule in league..without tom brady and no playoffs
glad to see someone in the national press understands that pass/run ratios are not relevant to winning. the fact that phily passes a lot improves their chance at winning, not the opposite.
the packer comparison to the indy game is perfect. if mike sherman had any masculine equipment, and wasn't a conservative and fearful coach he would still be at the helm of the packers today. 4th and 1 and the opportunity to win like a man and he punts. i hate that guy.
Matt,
I'm glad you are in command of the facts, instead of shooting from the hip why don't you do some research...
They didn't tape offensive signals, they taped defensive signals which are given out in the open....for everyone to see...he taped rather than have someone write them down to chart tendencies for down and distance.. and it was for use in future games against that opponent, but then again, you know all that right?
The big question from the NE/PHI superbowl you ought to ask was why did Philly they take so much time running the offense when they needed 2 scores...if you remember, McNabb was alledgedly puking and was out of breath, so they had to slow down. When they did cut it to 3 pts, they didn't have enough time to try to tie it up...
@yahoodave
Yeah, going 11-5 with a weak defense and a QB who didn't play in college makes Belichick overrated. They missed the playoffs by a game, you retard.
Face it, the only reason any of you hate the Patriots or Belichick is because of their/his record of excellence in the past decade. It was the same with the 49ers and the Cowboys. People love to hate whoever is on top.
Matt, clearly you're a winner. Same as yahoodave. Guys, please don't breed.
Pats won 11 games in '08 with what essentially is a first year starter. Coaching plays a significant role in that situation. Can't nitpick and use the facts you want without regard to the context.
"Face it, the only reason any of you hate the Patriots or Belichick is because of their/his record of excellence in the past decade. It was the same with the 49ers and the Cowboys. People love to hate whoever is on top. "
Patriots, 2004 Super Bowl champs. Yep, they are definitely on top!
As a pats fan, I had zero complaint about the call. thats the kind of gutsy call I love Belichick for, and I won't turn on him when every once in a while it doesn't work out. What I am upset about are the blown red zone opportunities in the 4th quarter. The Pats were in position to put the game out of reach twice before the 4th and 2 play, and came away with a fumble and a field goal. Had the team executed there, victory would have been earned long before it came down to a thing margin of risk reward.
The Pats must find a way to consistently close out drives with touchdowns. That has been the problem that has led to all three of their losses.
@yahoodave
Yeah, going 11-5 with a weak defense and a QB who didn't play in college makes Belichick overrated. They missed the playoffs by a game, you retard.
Face it, the only reason any of you hate the Patriots or Belichick is because of their/his record of excellence in the past decade. It was the same with the 49ers and the Cowboys. People love to hate whoever is on top.
Whether on a short field or a long field, Peyton would have driven the Colts to the winning score. The G.O.A.T. quarterback is getting to the point where he can no longer be denied. If it was me, I would have kicked it deep and while I'm not a Bill Belichick fan, he could forget more about football than I could ever know. With that said, I cease my sayings on the matter. As for the Browns, my HDTV signal shut off randomly (the new Dish Network DVR my dad bought should assuage that problem) but it was fitting. I love the NFL, so I adjure Commissioner Goodell: please do not make those of us who are loyal fans angry by putting the Browns on national television again. Much like your parents buying you a pizza or a milkshake for good grades in school, the right to play on national television should be earned. GO BRONCOS! May we down the Chargers Sunday and again, Lombardi, thanks! No one can refute the teacher of a graduate NFL course, which you are. We all learn so much from you.
Yahoo dave and Matt...thanks for bringing the ESPN board mentality to this site....NOT.
Seriously, if you want to whine and namecall I think most of us who come here to talk actual football and use logical critique/thought/opinions instead of spewing mindless teenage hater smack (like you two do) would love it.
/rant off
I was not in favor of the call when BB did it. I do appreciate all the rationale behind it that I have since read here and elsewhere and it does make sense. I always believe whether things fail or succeed that BB does what he thinks is best for the team at all times. If that means I drink kool aid, so be it. It doesn't mean I always like every decision he and the Pats make, just that I trust his motives. While that sounds like a given (coaches making decisions with ONLY winning in mind) I don't believe it is always the case.
Jack, well said... my thoughts exactly....
The highlight during the Cleveland game came from my wife! She said that the Browns look like Tootsie Rolls due to their jerseys. There could not be a more fitting name for such a horrendous team. I now dub them the Cleveland Tootsies!
Mike,
Personally I have no issues with the 4th down call, it was gutsy and I much rather my team lose like the Patriots did, than by punting and watching Manning drive it down your throat.
What does bug me is that there is a bias in game and clock management crticism. Take a look at the 2nd to last drivefor NE before the end of the 2nd Q. The Patriots get the ball with 4:17 left in position to drain some clock and maybe get some more points on the board before halftime and the Pats throw 3 straight incompletions.
Isn't this exactly the situation you have criticized over and over from A Reid and other coaches? Why is it BB gets a pass?
This had no repercutions, but it allowed Manning not one, but 2 shots as the Colts punted and where able to get the ball back by using a timeout which they would not have had if the Pats had made Indy use them instead of throwing 3 incompletions
Let us assume that if the Pats had made the first down they would have won the game. The math then becomes.
Decision Quality = Chance of making first down + chance of failing to convert * chance of stopping short Colts drive - chance of failing to convert * chance of stopping long Colts drive
If that number is positive, it is a good decision. I think that if someone plugs honest numbers into that equation, they will be forced to conclude that BB made the right decision. It didn't work out, of course, but it was still the right thing to do given the information at the time.
The Patriots get the ball with 4:17 left in position to drain some clock and maybe get some more points on the board before halftime and the.
I always believe whether things fail or succeed that BB does what he thinks is best for the team at all times.
Thank you for information.
Nov 17, 2009
10:54 AM
The opponent in the second half is the clock.