QUOTE: “Man does not simply exist, but always decides what his existence will be, what he will become in the next moment.” -- Viktor Frankl
I was stunned, shocked and surprised -- and obviously wrong -- in my prediction that Mike Holmgren would fire Eric Mangini as Browns head coach. He decided to keep him, albeit possibly for just one year. Nevertheless, Holmgren’s patience may have delayed any progress. For me, having known both men, there isn’t enough common ground in how they run their programs to think this can work. I didn’t think it could work before, and I still don’t think it can work. For Holmgren to get his program moving in the right direction, he needs to start clean. Otherwise, he’s wasting a year in his rebuilding. As he assumes his role as a team executive, he can’t think like a former coach; he must think like an executive, someone who can examine the short- and long-range planning of the organization.
My attitude toward this decision is not based solely on my belief that Mangini is not a good coach. It’s more about feeling that you need everyone in the organization believing in the same philosophy, going in the same direction. Bill Walsh once said about infighting in organizations, “The Civil War was the ugliest war to fight,” and this decision may prompt infighting unless Holmgren is in the building every day to handle the problems that arise. With a new general manager coming into the front office, the Browns will have many different “opinions,” and someone is going to have to manage those opinions correctly. I’m not looking to build and organization of people who think just one way, but I want a building full of people who share a similar philosophy.
For example, my view of football falls in line with the Bill Belichick view, or the Bill Parcells view, but that doesn’t mean we agree on every move — we just agree on the overall philosophy of team building. With Holmgren never having been just the team executive, this will require that his coach share his vision, his blueprint and his thought process, or else there will be too many bumps in the road.
So why did Holmgren keep Mangini? For one, it allows him to revisit this decision next year when the coaching landscape might be very different. It also allows him to be above any blame since whatever goes wrong next season will put Mangini in the line of fire. It also gives him time to see if he gets the urge to return to coaching, and if he does, he can easily remove Mangini and go back to the sidelines one more time. So there are more compelling reasons for Mangini’s return than just the four-game win streak and the sensitivity for coaches.
Lions news
Here’s what Lions GM Martin Mayhew had to say about the team: “It's not nearly good enough. But it's getting better, and that better continue. I would say, obviously, 2-14 is unacceptable. That's not what we're gonna be about. And I think 2-14 really is something that the entire organization needs to improve on. Nobody should feel comfortable or, ‘At least my department did a good job’ or ‘At least we did good.’ ... Everybody is a part of 2-14. And that's something we have to have a sense of urgency about improving. We don't plan on doing that again.”
If he doesn’t plan on doing that again, Mayhew better get some better players on the field. When head coach Jim Schwartz took over, the Lions were so bad in terms of talent, many thought going 0-16 again was possible. Winning two games is not very good, but the Lions have a long way to go to restore the roar, and it starts with Mayhew finding some talent. He was in Detroit during the Matt Millen era, so he’s been a part of the decisions in the past. He must accept responsibility of the lack of talent.
Raider News
Since Bagdad Bob, has there been a worse public relations man than the Raiders’ John Herrera? Here’s another example of his work:
Herrera, the team’s senior executive, responding to an offer from former Raiders quarterback Rich Gannon to help JaMarcus Russell, said that neither owner Al Davis, Russell, coach Tom Cable or the team needs any help from Gannon and that "maybe it's Rich that needs the help."
We know Herrera needs the help, but why lash out at the man who was responsible for the only winning years since the Raiders returned to Oakland from L.A.? Why attack Gannon, who was league MVP and took the organization to a Super Bowl? Because he, like many, think it is time for the owner to stop being involved? I wonder if John and Bagdad Bob have conversations to decide who can make the most ridiculous comments.
Follow me on Twitter: michaelombardi
For another take on why Mangini is back in Cleveland, check out this story from Bleacher Report.
This essentially buys Holmgren and the new GM (whoever that is) a year to get acclimated and formluate a solid go-forward plan. Don't you think that's wise? In business wouldn't you take some time to observe before making drastic changes in your department? And in a highly seasonal business like the NFL, seems to me this means Holmgren's choice is either to make a rushed decision now (in the middle of setting up a staff and preparing for the draft) so that the new guy has time to hire his own staff and prepare for minicamps etc, or let the guy under contract stay a year and address it when the rest of the pieces are in place.
Also I'd like to hear more of a compare/contrast of Holmgren and Mangini given what you know about them. Because from the outside, there's some similarities - they both are looking at the bigger picture of the program, both very detail oriented. Holmgren would seem to be the better teacher and communicator, but potentially this is a very good opportunity for Mangini to improve via mentoring.
Sir -- I respect your opinion and feel you make good points on most subjects. I am a Die Hard-Browns fan, and like you I felt Mike H. would fire Mangini. We were both wrong. I Hope you are wrong about it not being able to work. because if you are correct, browns fans are in for lots of bead games again this year. I like many have to trust "the Big Show" to make changes in personnel that will show progress this year. Now we must wait and see...
Ross
Kudos to you for acknowledging the incorrect prediction and sticking to your reasons why Mangini should have been fired while also explaining why Holmgren would have kept him. I'm hoping that at the very least that Holmgren told him exactly how finely his body parts would be chopped up if he ever, ever, ever tried to end-run Holmgen's authority or point fingers at others in the organization when things go badly.
I'm also very curious about how Holmgren will try to resolve the mess with George Kokinis. Any thoughts on this, and where Kokinis might wind up?
Kudos to you for acknowledging the incorrect prediction and sticking to your reasons why Mangini should have been fired while also explaining why Holmgren would have kept him. I'm hoping that at the very least that Holmgren told him exactly how finely his body parts would be chopped up if he ever, ever, ever tried to end-run Holmgen's authority or point fingers at others in the organization when things go badly.
I'm also very curious about how Holmgren will try to resolve the mess with George Kokinis. Any thoughts on this, and where Kokinis might wind up?
Based on the school of hard knocks, I make this observation. When a new head honcho takes over an organization, the first key to survival and sucess is making sure everyone is on the same page regarding operating philosophy. The most talented employee in the world is worthless if that person is not willing to put his/her personal opinions aside and work for the common good once a final decision on a topic has been made.
When a company is operating as poorly as the Browns have been, the ONLY way to start over is to simply start over. Clean house and rebuild.
MrLbCrazy13--
Another incorrect prediction aimed at a rival? Brilliant!!
Accountability, Sir! Accountability? Sir?
the Secret
The lockout possiblity is an equalizer, and also a snag into any rebuilding plan coming. It will equalize programs on a familiarity aspect. Rebuilding ones, a lockout will be an additional mountain to climb, because learning a new system includes a time away from that system.
It will be very interesting to see how Mangini and Holmgren co-exist in Cleveland next year. Will Mangini be able to accept the fact that Holmgen, not Mangini, will now have the final say on all football matters? And will they be able to co-exist on a personal level? Holmgren needs look no further than his old stomping grounds in Green Bay as an example of what can go wrong. When Ted Thompson took over in 2005 he kept Mike Sherman as head coach, after Sherman had been stripped of his GM duties following a 2004 playoff loss to Minnesota. According to Bob Harlan, Sherman was bitter about losing his power to make personnel moves, and even worse, was unable to develop a personal relationship with Thompson. The result was a 4-12 disaster in 2005 and Sherman being fired (and that was after 3 straight division title seasons). I can easily see this scenario playing out in Cleveland. But I think Holmgren won't hesitate to make a change next season if it goes south, and he might feel that there will be better coaching candidates available in 2011 (Cowher, Dungy, Gruden?).
In my mind, the difference in the dynamic in Cleveland is going to be that there is no doubt that Holmgren is in charge, and that Holmgren will be making the decisions. I would think that Mangini MUST understand that he has no hope of winning a power struggle with Holmgren. Under those circumstances, he should understand that he has to get in line with what Holmgren wants to do.
On the other hand, I'm not sure how these two can co-exist with respect to how they are going to build the team. What kind of offense are they going to run next year? It doesn't seem exactly fair for Holmgren to have the final say on who the coaches and players are going to be, if those guys aren't consistent with what Mangini wants to do.
Unless Mangini is willing to completely forego any control over his staff, player acquisition, and offensive/defensive strategy (maybe he is), it does seem like this situation definitely has the potential to end badly.
Still hating on the Manginious. Just give up already. The guy deserved to stay on, and Holmgren made the right move. To start speculating about 2001 is a waste of time. If mangini wins 10 games next year, he'll be around in 2011. For all you know, holmgren may actually be able to learn a lot from mangnini. The Rob Ryan/Mangini defense was very impressive down the stretch and that team never quit. Mangini seems to impress almost everyone who interviews him, plays for him, and works for him. Not only that, but as an executive it was a good move, as Holmgren just saved the owner a ton of $ by not firing him.
I think that it makes a lot of sense for Holmgren to keep Mangini around for one more year. The Browns are essentially going to strip down to bare essentials. They have no QB and they obviously are planning to jettison their most explosive player. The Browns have a lot of nice pieces, but there is no way they will put together a winning season next year. Why not draft for the future while allowing Mangini to absorb the rebuilding years trials and the inevitable poor record. I'm sure that the owner is on board with this plan as it saves him a ton of money to retain Mangini rather than hire a big name coach at this juncture.
Holmgren gets to draft his QB of the future, along with other positions, and trade away the players he feels do not have a place in the future. I would be shocked if Holmgren does not have a coach of the future in mind right now.
Mike, give it a break!!!!!!! For someone who worked for the Raiders and Browns before you are not exeactly Mr. Winner!
Holmgren knows Mangini can flat out coach... you were wrong... say you were wrong and move on
instead fo saying you were wrong and you and all your buddies have to come up with conspiracy theories
I agree with everything in nate's post.
The Browns have a long way to go before they get good. And as a DC fan who just lived through the Zorn Era (and the Spurrier Era....), you can do a LOT worse than having Mangini as your head coach (and HC only). I'm sure money played a role, and I'm sure Holmgren's maybe wanting to coach again played a role. But I can see the sense in it.
Nice job, Lombardi.
As for the Raiders, I hope nothing changes. The Broncos are having a hard enough time getting past the Chargers in the division, the longer the Raiders continue their internal infighting, the better. As for Holmgren, I can easily see a comparable situation to what happened with Pat Riley and Stan Van Gundy with the Miami Heat.
Judging by the silly low contract offer the Browns gave to Josh Cribbs I think the Browns are in money saving mode . My guess is due to the uncapped year coming up . Anyhow with Mangini primarily being a defensive guy it probably makes keeping him more stomachable . I just made that word up .
Its hard for a puppet to become a decent PR man like Herrera or Bagdad Bob . Add to that , being a puppet for an insane leader like Sadam Hussein or Al Davis it would have to be impossible . I don't know this John Herrera but I would like to believe that when he said Jamarcus Russell missed a mandatory meeting to go to Vegas for an undisclosed " legitimate reason" that it was all he could do not to puke in his mouth .
Cleveland has paid for a great football man, but in Holmgren, it has only gotten a competent one. Holmgren often couldn't trust talented young players, and kept guys like Robert Brooks and Dorsey Levens on the sidelines one year too long. He let Shanahan pick his pocket for a Super Bowl he should have won, because he allowed himself and his team to be distracted with his professional future. He failed to furnish himself enough talent when he had the power in Seattle.
I predict he will elevate Cleveland, in time, to football competence - but not greatness. IE: Teams that qualify for the playoffs but exit early. Will he have earned his 50 million? From a business standpoint, I would say yes, he will generate that much dough for the organization. A Super Bowl win? I don't think so. And my opinion of Holmgren is that he will be OK with that.
Mike - I am no Mangini fan, but it has to say something about him that the team, with every reason to quit, played hard for him all season. And maybe, he is improving as a coach and learning how to better deal with people. Too often we judge coaches and players and never realize that they can change, they can improve. I am not the same person in my job I was a few years ago when I started, and the same is true for coaches. Now maybe nothing has changed with Mangini, but at least from a distance, the way his team played down the stretch had to say something about his ability to coach that team.
I guess that Holmgren must have lost his copy of "The Packer Way" by Ron Wolf. In it, Wolf talks about coming into a losing situation and what hard decisions he had to make. Interesting that Wolf took the Packer job about a month before season's end. It told him all he wanted to know about Lindy Infante. He promptly fired him and brought in his own guy - Holmgren.
Holmgren took the job with time left in the season. He could have made the change. Maybe there were no good available candidates on Bob LaMontes client roster lol.
You have it all wrong. The problem with firing Mangini now is that Holmgren doesn't have a GM in place. Would he postpone hiring a coach until his GM choice was on board? It would complicate matters greatly to first hire a coach and then find a GM who agrees with the coaching hire. Holmgren is building for the long term. He needs to get it right and that means being patient. Having said that, I don't see Holmgren as being right for the job anyway. He is a great coach, his abilities as an executive are very iffy.
Maybe you were wrong on Mangenius (and I predict this actually turns out OK) but you get a LOT of mulligans for getting Shanahan right in August!
But Mike, please spare us the false incredulity when it comes to the Raiders, OK? "why lash out at the man who was responsible for the only winning years since the Raiders returned to Oakland from L.A.? Why attack Gannon, who was league MVP and took the organization to a Super Bowl? Because he, like many, think it is time for the owner to stop being involved?"
You know why. You know Gannon burned that bridge years ago. Please spare us, OK?
A list of thank yous and a final...
Even if you called me an idiot,...
Their success will depend on QB...
Titans coach wants Chris Johnson...
Now is the QB’s chance to show...
Jan 08, 2010
10:57 AM
Mike, do you think the Browns are keeping Mangini due to the pending lockout? With the owner now on the hook to pay Holmgren and Mangini, firing him now would require him to pay all three (Mangini, Holmgren, new coach) during the lockout when nobody is working. For a franchise known for frugality, it has to be a possibilty. Mangini winning the last 4 games of the year may certainly have been enough of a cover to keep him around with fans, but ultimately, this may have been a money decision (shocking). Plus, I like your idea that it gives Holmgren more time to decide if he wants to go back to the sideline, without wasting the owner's money.