|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
I think whoever Holmgren/Heckert bring in will be a good man for a job.
We all think that Holmgren and Heckert do a good job, right? If so we should trust that they know what they are doing. Holmgren coached with Mornhinweg. Heckert was the GM of a team that Mornhinweg coached on. They should know if the guy is qualified.
That's my point.
And I bet it's someone the fans won't like. Then we'll hear the backlash instead of patience, and the unquenchable thirst for firing coaches, coordinators and front office people will continue.
Although, I believe in Tom Heckert. Tom Heckert alone should prevent that from happening because of the future talent on the field.
We need to not resist. We need to accept and support whatever decision is made.
Last edited by Ammo; 01/03/11 01:38 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218 |
I'm tired of hearing that this team has not progressed from 2009 to 2010.
Sure it's easy to point out the last 3-5 Weeks as a regress, but I believe injuries had a lot to do with that.
The point is, progress does not always translate into Wins. This team is on the right track, but we still need another 1-2 years to acquire the talent and allow that talent to develop.
However, a new offensive approach is needed. With more Offensive talent and a more qualified OC, the Browns would easily be 8-8 at worst.
If your Defense is allowing 19.4 PPG, and your Offense fails to at least score 21 PPG, then your problems are on offense. (These figures do not include the Steeler's Week 17 game).
With as many close games we had, it was because we just simply did not score more points then the opponent. It's as simple as that.
Firing Mangini would be a mistake, and it'd be another 3-5 Years of rebuilding.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,068 Likes: 1115
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,068 Likes: 1115 |
dive into your bunker, Hooter...
you done put a target on your back with a single common-sense post.
(Expect me to be diving in there right after you, now that I opened my big mouth in support)
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Firing Mangini would be a mistake, and it'd be another 3-5 Years of rebuilding.
It's arguments like these, where they are based on nothing more than opinion but are passed off as facts, really grate at me.
Firing Mangini could also be the greatest thing ever and put us a year ahead of schedule. The simple fact is that Mangini is a decent coach with bad game day skills. I don't think he's going to wake up one day and all of a sudden become calm on the sideline. JMHO of course.
We can do worse than Mangini and we can do better. Being pissed about a possible firing of an average coach is kinda crazy. I think we've gotten so used to crummy coaching that Mangini looks like Vince Lombardi in comparison.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218 |
Which is why I do more reading then posting.
There are a few posters here that make great sense, and then there are others that I can only laugh at.
If you can't see beyond W's and L's, then most likely you don't know what your talking about.
I'm not saying Mangini is the answer, but answer me this:
While it takes a Head Coach at least 2-3 Years to build THEIR Roster with the personnel and scheme they wish to run, how can we ever expect to see the finished product if their entire time in Cleveland was spent building the team?
So, now a new Head Coach comes in, and spends the next year removing players that do not fit the scheme the current Head Coach wants to run, and then another 2-3 years of building the roster with their own players, how can you expect that Head Coach to take someone else's roster and make it their own and expect immediate success?
Especially for a team that haven't seen success in quite some time. Two winning seasons since 1999 does not scream a team that is ready to make a serious run at contention. We need a TOTAL rebuild, and that takes time.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
Firing Mangini would be a mistake, and it'd be another 3-5 Years of rebuilding.
I would argue that firing Mangini would not require 3-5 more years of rebuilding but would continue with the building of the team that Mangini started.
Mangini has said it himself, he doesn't want to be "The Cleaner". A guy that comes in a cleans up the mess, then the next guy comes in and immediately reaps the benefits.
Maybe Mangini was the right guy to have after Savage/Crennel. He came in cleaned up a chaotic organization. He might have ran his course. Maybe what he is really good at is getting rid of all the BS.
I don't know. I would like to see Mangini another year (with a few new coaches), but I don't think it would be a step back if he was fired.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218 |
Quote:
Quote:
Firing Mangini would be a mistake, and it'd be another 3-5 Years of rebuilding.
It's arguments like these, where they are based on nothing more than opinion but are passed off as facts, really grate at me.
Firing Mangini could also be the greatest thing ever and put us a year ahead of schedule. The simple fact is that Mangini is a decent coach with bad game day skills. I don't think he's going to wake up one day and all of a sudden become calm on the sideline. JMHO of course.
We can do worse than Mangini and we can do better. Being pissed about a possible firing of an average coach is kinda crazy. I think we've gotten so used to crummy coaching that Mangini looks like Vince Lombardi in comparison.
So you assume the next person that takes control of this team is going to agree with the players and scheme Mangini has acquired? Point is, the new Head Coach would have to replace players to fit HIS scheme, not the current scheme. That takes at least one year to do. It takes at least two years to acquire talent, and at least another year for that talent to develop together. That's four years by my calculations. Sticking with Mangini, we'd know for sure if he is the right Head Coach for the Browns in roughly two years.
Also, Clock Management and Game Day decisions seem to be everyone's disappointment with Mangini.
Does anyone actually know who is making these terrible decisions? Is it Daboll's indecisiveness?
I don't know who is at fault, it could be Mangini, maybe not. Perhaps Mangini expects his assistants to do their job and not have Mangini undermine them.
I don't know the answer, and I'll admit it. But this team has improved from 2009. Until I see the team regress, I say lets keep going with the progress, no matter how small it may seem.
Each year of progress is one step closer to contention. So as far as I'm concerned, Mangini has progressed this team overall from 2009. I'd love to see what kind of progress Mangini can make from 2010 to 2011.
We already know 5-11 is the worst we should expect from this team.
Last edited by GoHooterGo; 01/03/11 03:42 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,482 Likes: 34
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,482 Likes: 34 |
I may have a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering but it doesn't take a math genius to realize a few facts.
1) 53 man rosters
2) 7 draft picks (assuming 1 per round)
Then you get to add in free agency. This year (just as an example) there are 392 free agents to be. Some of them will retire and/or just not be asked back to a team. I'll be generous and say 90% come back. That's 350 free agents for 30 teams, or, 11 (rounded down) free agents per team.
So, on average (obviously some years you get more, some less) you can add 18 players to a 53 man roster in one off-season. That means it requires 3 FULL YEARS just to turn over a roster. To me then, it seems, you should give ANY coach 4 years before you evaluate them if the team requires a full rebuild. Three years just to acquire the players/turn over the roster and then one additional year to see the results of the rebuild. I'm not exactly sure how anyone can expect results from a complete tear down and rebuild after two years when only half to two-thirds of the roster MAX could have even been addressed to this point.
If, after 4 years, you don't think you are any better off than when you started, then you can start talking about a coach being a "failure". Firing anyone before then is just spinning the wheels. Making a move to make a move. Appeasing the masses.
The people who are calling for Mangini's head now are the same people who didn't want him hired from the beginning. Of course they want him gone. I hope he's retained but I know life isn't fair and he just might be fired. So be it. But know, that in hiring yet ANOTHER coach, you better be willing to wait 3-4 years AGAIN to judge the next guy and "expect" wins because that's what it takes. Everybody on board with that??? I know I'm willing to give whomever that is the time, but I'm pretty darn confident the general consensus won't be so forgiving.
So what to do? If you can't beat em, join em I guess. So I'm officially on the fire *insert next coach name here* bandwagon as soon as he loses his first game next year. Don't worry though I promise I won't freak out if he loses in the pre-season. See, I'm plenty patient.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/GraffZ06/browns_factory_sig.jpg) Fear us, for we are the BROWNS, led by the mighty BM! Only in Cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
I don't know the answer, and I'll admit it. But this team has improved from 2009.
It's hard not to improve on the historic and epic failure that was 2009. It was an aberration that they won out the last 4 games. I say aberration because even with an improved roster, even with a kickass running game, none of that carried over to 2010.
Yes, we had a much tougher schedule overall but we lost to most of the teams we should have beat. Had those last 4 games of '09 been any indication of a team who suddenly broke through and turned the corner then what we saw in in 2010 was either a regression or simply a return to what was the 1-11 start we saw in '09.
If finishing out with 4 wins were a sign that the team had finally become legit then we should have beat either KC and TB in the beginning of the season, especially since we were winning both games and had a chance all the way to the end. We should have beat the Bills and bengals. Add those to the win column and it's a winning 9-7 season. Lose one of them and it's still a non-losing season at 8-8 . Lose two of them and it's still a respectable 7-9. Lose three of them and it's a dubious 6-10. Lose all of them and it's a despicable 5-11 where we sit now.
That's not making the win/loss record as the defining reason to retain or fire a head coach. But all of those games were lost for a reason. If you have a team who is disciplined, lacking in mental penalties and plays tough to the end then what is the reason for losing games vs. teams that we should have beaten?
We lost to teams who picked ahead of us in the 2010 draft (KC-TB) and to two 2-win teams, late in the season (Bills-bengals). And one of our wins was vs. the team with the worst record (C) which was a gimmie win when their kicker missed an easy field goal on the last play of the game. How did that game get so close?
Yes, we played with three quarterbacks throughout the season and it's hard to have any continuity playing so many QB's. But all of them were better than what we trotted out there in '09. But for a team who turned the corner at the end of '09 and who had an improved 2010 roster on both sides of the ball and had better quarterbacking than '09 they should have, at the very least, beat the worst of the worst, but couldn't.
We won two teaser games vs. two of the best teams in the NFL. For some reason those games were prepared for in a manner of playing to win. What happened in the other 14 games? Where did that kind of game planning and in-game calls go? Why was that approach not taken vs. bad teams? I will never figure this out.
Holmgren was at a loss to explain how we won out in '09 without throwing the ball and rightly so. It was an aberration. It was something that doesn't happen. As proof of that, none of it carried over to 2010.
Improving over 2009 should have been the least of expectations, not a banner to fly proclaiming a step in the right direction. Disciplined, void of mental penalties and playing tough are the minimum requirements. Although those characteristics are necessary there's a lot more to winning football games. As well, the discipline and playing tough can be short-lived if not rewarded with wins. People, and players are people, tend to give up or give less if busting their ass yields no reward.
I think we may have seen that vs. the Bills, bengals and Steelers. I'm not saying the team "gave up", what I'm saying is that in those games they lacked the toughness to compete. In each of those recent losses it looked obvious to me that the opponent wanted it more than the Browns did.
When you get nothing for your trouble you tend to not go to the trouble.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
That means it requires 3 FULL YEARS just to turn over a roster. To me then, it seems, you should give ANY coach 4 years before you evaluate them if the team requires a full rebuild.
I agree with you wholeheartedly if talent is the only issue. If a lack of talent is what is causing your team to loose then by all means take the time to fix the roster before making coaching changes.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 218 |
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know the answer, and I'll admit it. But this team has improved from 2009.
It's hard not to improve on the historic and epic failure that was 2009. It was an aberration that they won out the last 4 games. I say aberration because even with an improved roster, even with a kickass running game, none of that carried over to 2010.
Yes, we had a much tougher schedule overall but we lost to most of the teams we should have beat. Had those last 4 games of '09 been any indication of a team who suddenly broke through and turned the corner then what we saw in in 2010 was either a regression or simply a return to what was the 1-11 start we saw in '09.
If finishing out with 4 wins were a sign that the team had finally become legit then we should have beat either KC and TB in the beginning of the season, especially since we were winning both games and had a chance all the way to the end. We should have beat the Bills and bengals. Add those to the win column and it's a winning 9-7 season. Lose one of them and it's still a non-losing season at 8-8 . Lose two of them and it's still a respectable 7-9. Lose three of them and it's a dubious 6-10. Lose all of them and it's a despicable 5-11 where we sit now.
That's not making the win/loss record as the defining reason to retain or fire a head coach. But all of those games were lost for a reason. If you have a team who is disciplined, lacking in mental penalties and plays tough to the end then what is the reason for losing games vs. teams that we should have beaten?
We lost to teams who picked ahead of us in the 2010 draft (KC-TB) and to two 2-win teams, late in the season (Bills-bengals). And one of our wins was vs. the team with the worst record (C) which was a gimmie win when their kicker missed an easy field goal on the last play of the game. How did that game get so close?
Yes, we played with three quarterbacks throughout the season and it's hard to have any continuity playing so many QB's. But all of them were better than what we trotted out there in '09. But for a team who turned the corner at the end of '09 and who had an improved 2010 roster on both sides of the ball and had better quarterbacking than '09 they should have, at the very least, beat the worst of the worst, but couldn't.
We won two teaser games vs. two of the best teams in the NFL. For some reason those games were prepared for in a manner of playing to win. What happened in the other 14 games? Where did that kind of game planning and in-game calls go? Why was that approach not taken vs. bad teams? I will never figure this out.
Holmgren was at a loss to explain how we won out in '09 without throwing the ball and rightly so. It was an aberration. It was something that doesn't happen. As proof of that, none of it carried over to 2010.
Improving over 2009 should have been the least of expectations, not a banner to fly proclaiming a step in the right direction. Disciplined, void of mental penalties and playing tough are the minimum requirements. Although those characteristics are necessary there's a lot more to winning football games. As well, the discipline and playing tough can be short-lived if not rewarded with wins. People, and players are people, tend to give up or give less if busting their ass yields no reward.
I think we may have seen that vs. the Bills, bengals and Steelers. I'm not saying the team "gave up", what I'm saying is that in those games they lacked the toughness to compete. In each of those recent losses it looked obvious to me that the opponent wanted it more than the Browns did.
When you get nothing for your trouble you tend to not go to the trouble.
The reason the Browns lost a lot of those close games came down to two things: Depth and Talent.
The Browns were outmatched Talent wise by nearly every team they played with the exception of the Bills and Panthers.
In the end, we were just not good enough to play with them for 4 Quarters.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,445 |
Quote:
Good players make coaches look good.
BS BS BS BS BS
Been waiting for that to come out of someones mouth...
Tell that to Wade Phillips...Major Talent...Go back to a DC spot...
How bout Marv Lewis...Solid Talent...Needs to go back to being a DC...
Childress...He just needs to LEAVE for good...
And the biggest...NUMERO UNO FAILURE as a HC...Norv Turner...
These are all HC's who have SOLID TALENT all over the field and just flat out FAIL...Every single one of em' deserve to be AXED...And never be a HC again...I c 2 solid DC's there and 2 solid OC's...But they SUCK as HC's...
Maybe Mangini should be ranked with Phillips and Lewis...But there is ONE difference between Mangini and all 4 of those HC's...They've all been given enough chance to excel with PLAYMAKERS on their collective rosters...And all 4 FAILED...And not after 1 or 2 years...For multiple years...
The Browns have ONE playmaker in Haden...A ROOKIE...
That right there is what Holmgren needs to look at to make this decision...Right thru the Miami game Mangini was pretty much a LOCK to move ahead right here...Doing what was done with this roster was solid...The 3 game run with NO/NE/Jets was outstanding...Then winning 2 of the next 3...One could access that we lost to the Jets and Jax because of a LACK of a PLAYMAKER..
What if we HAD those playmakers???...Hardesty???...A Green or Jones out wide???...A DE who can actually hold his damn ground...(DAREUS!!!)...An ILB who actually can get to the damn LOS to make a play on a running play instead of constantly WAITING for the play to come to him???...An OLB with a little SPEED...
Mangini's fate may be sealed...But it sure as hell did not help that he's running a team that has ONE PLAYMAKER...
And it sure as hell don't help that he's got defense that needs to line up in some funky ass alignments in order to get even a slight bit of pressure on the backfield...Due the LACK of a PLAYMAKER...
Maybe Mangini at this point has coached the way he has because he actually KNOWS what he's dealing with roster wise...He knows the limitations he's got to deal with...Bone-Headed decisions at times aside...
What this team needs is several playmakers and an OC who knows how to run an offense...They need Hardesty back...An NFL caliber Defensive End and a REAL ILB...
Then and only then will we ever know exactly how far Mangini can take us...
Phillips/Lewis/Childress and Turner have HAD that chance...Mangini HAS NOT...
Go Browns!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,788 Likes: 170
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,788 Likes: 170 |
Is it possible that the Browns need better talent in player personnel...and better talent on the coaching staff?
Without a doubt...both need to be improved upon to take the team to the next level.
Heckert and Holmgren need to continue their push to add more talent via the draft and free agency...AND...when it comes to the Browns coaching staff, someone with a lot of experience at the NFL level is needed to evaluate the performances of the coaches.
We might have someone well qualified to handle that job...
Who hired Heckert?
It's time for the Browns to take the next another step forward, upgrading the coaching staff while continuing to improve the player talent...
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,788 Likes: 170
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,788 Likes: 170 |
I don't know if Browns fans are aware of this fact...
Marty Mornhinweg played QB in high school...
...any idea who Marty's high school coach was?
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
And I bet it's someone the fans won't like. Then we'll hear the backlash instead of patience, and the unquenchable thirst for firing coaches, coordinators and front office people will continue.
The fans in Cleveland are nothing if not patient. Some may not like whoever is picked. I doubt there is a unanimous choice anywhere. This mob you've conjured up doesn't exist. Except , of course, if you don't like the decision. 
Quote:
We need to not resist. We need to accept and support whatever decision is made.
This from the guy who says he's gonna puke every time Mangini getting fired is mentioned. 
Quote:
Sure it's easy to point out the last 3-5 Weeks as a regress, but I believe injuries had a lot to do with that.
This quote is from someone else but I put it in here because it's another thing I get tired of hearing. Injuries have hit other teams hard, too. Strangely, though, they manage to fight through them and still win. We manage to tank. Shoot me, but I think the coaching staff may have something to do with that.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Quote:
I don't know if Browns fans are aware of this fact...
Marty Mornhinweg played QB in high school...
...any idea who Marty's high school coach was?
Other thread, I think,...Mikey. It was labeled nepotism.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
Quote:
Good players make coaches look good.
BS BS BS BS BS
Been waiting for that to come out of someones mouth...
Tell that to Wade Phillips...Major Talent...Go back to a DC spot...
How bout Marv Lewis...Solid Talent...Needs to go back to being a DC...
Childress...He just needs to LEAVE for good...
And the biggest...NUMERO UNO FAILURE as a HC...Norv Turner...
You were so quick to jump on me you don't realize that I said that already. If you read through my posts in this thread, I made it VERY VERY VERY clear that Wade Phillips, Chilly and Norv were examples of coaches who do deserve to be fired.
Mangini doesn't have anywhere NEAR the talent to work with that these guys do and until yesterday the team didn't quit on him.
As for Marvin Lewis, he can coach my team any day of the week. Not his fault the Brown family saddles him with crap every year.
Carson Palmer looks light years better without Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber out there at receiver, by the way.
Last edited by Ammo; 01/03/11 09:34 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,433 Likes: 11 |
J/C
I've slept on yesterday's loss and I've come to a conclusion. Mike needs to do the unthinkable and needs to give Eric Mangini his full endorsement. I'm not sure what happened yesterday but considering how injured the team was on both sides a loss like this was bound to happen.
With that said, Mangini still has his short comings. He needs to listen to any offensive input that Mike has to offer. Daboll can remain with the team but I'd like to see him give up his OC position. As for Rob Ryan, we need to promote him to assistant head coach if we haven't already. Despite his ineffective coverage against screen passes, I would love to keep the guy around.
I don't see anyone out there who would be an immediate upgrade over what we already have. I'm tired of playing the "he's from X coaching tree so this is Y reason as we need to get him" game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,440
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,440 |
Quote:
So, now a new Head Coach comes in, and spends the next year removing players that do not fit the scheme the current Head Coach wants to run, and then another 2-3 years of building the roster with their own players, how can you expect that Head Coach to take someone Else's roster and make it their own and expect immediate success?
This process already started last year. The day MH was brought in we started finding his and Heckerts type of players. Sure EM had insight but he was no longer picking his guys. This isn't a complete tear down if they decide to fire EM because the foundation is still there in the front office.
Many have this argument because that is what they are used to seeing when this team fires someone. Normally they fire everyone and start from scratch all over again. This time the President and GM will pick a guy with the same general philosophy as they have then they will continue to build what they started last season.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 293
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 293 |
What we need is an OC cause we can"t score at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,788 Likes: 170
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,788 Likes: 170 |
Quote:
J/C
I've slept on yesterday's loss and I've come to a conclusion. Mike needs to do the unthinkable and needs to give Eric Mangini his full endorsement. I'm not sure what happened yesterday but considering how injured the team was on both sides a loss like this was bound to happen.
With that said, Mangini still has his short comings. He needs to listen to any offensive input that Mike has to offer. Daboll can remain with the team but I'd like to see him give up his OC position. As for Rob Ryan, we need to promote him to assistant head coach if we haven't already. Despite his ineffective coverage against screen passes, I would love to keep the guy around.
I don't see anyone out there who would be an immediate upgrade over what we already have. I'm tired of playing the "he's from X coaching tree so this is Y reason as we need to get him" game.
rocket...you need to do something...
Compare your thoughts and ideas to the real world moves that are going to be made by Holmgren and Heckert.
Judge yourself, to see how your thought process and ideas compare to the action made by football people with a ton of experience at the pro level.
If your ideas and projected moves do not happen, be honest enough to look in the mirror and say...man, I need to learn a lot about Pro football.
If your projections do happen, then stand on your soap box and tell everyone...look, I know what I'm talking about here.
BTW, Holmgren did not give Mangini his full endorsement...he fired him...so your already 0-1 on your projected moves.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Marty Mornhinweg
|
|
