January 30, 2011
Colt Vs Kolb

 

Adam Schefter is reporting that the Philadelphia Eagles have decided to franchise Mike Vick and trade Kevin Kolb.

More importantly to us, sources are listing the Browns as one of the teams potentially interested in trading for him.

You’re not going to find a bigger proponent than me of the notion that until your NFL team has a quarterback, they’re just not important. You’re also not going to find anyone more unsure than me about whether or not Colt McCoy is the real deal at the position.

Then why am I adamantly opposed to the possibility of Holmgren & Company dealing for Kolb?  Two simple reasons.

First, by almost every statistical category I’ve checked, McCoy was better than Kolb last season. From our friends at Advanced NFL Stats:

2010 COLT McCOY vs. KEVIN KOLB

Games played:  8 vs. 7

Win Probability Added: -0.18 vs -1.02

Expected Points Added: 16.5 vs 4.4

Completion %: 60.8 vs 60.8

Pass Yards per Game: 197 vs 171

INT per Game: 1.125 vs 1.0

% of Pass Attempts Over 15 yards: 20.3 vs 19.6

Adjusted Yards Per Attempt: 4.2 vs 3.8

In summary: McCoy played one more game than Kolb last season, but apart from throwing .125 more interceptions per game, was as good or better in every way.

I would highlight Completion Percentage, Percentage of Pass Attempts over 15 yards, and Adjusted Yards per Attempt in this comparison, because they illustrate that McCoy and Kolb are both West Coast style quarterbacks. In other words, both are equally well-suited toward the type of O that Pat Shurmur is going to run.

Add to the above that we were bombarded with report after report about McCoy’s leadership ability and presence in the huddle as a rookie, and I just don’t see a logical argument for the idea that Kolb is a superior quarterback.

This leads us to the second reason that I’m against the idea of a trade: compensation. If memory serves, the Eagles are supposedly asking for multiple picks, including at least one first rounder, for Kolb. The Browns need talent all over the field, with the possible exception of RB and the center to left side of the O line. Given that reality, shipping off multiple picks in order to acquire a quarterback who is not markedly better than your incumbent seems like about as good an idea as wearing capri pants to a UAW bar.

So while I’m not yet sold on McCoy, I hope the Browns brain / mustache trust recognizes that they need a talented, deep draft class more than they need another unproven quarterback.

-T

January 12, 2011
Chucky Commits to MNF, Shurmur Smiles and Waits

 Chucky

Well, last night it happend — Jon Gruden verbally committed back to Monday Night Football, he will not enter the draft, he will not pass Go, he will continue to collect on the last year of his Tampa Bay contract.

Yes, he was a JMID favorite to be the next Browns coach — well, at least my favorite pick, but it was not meant to be.  However, in true “We’re Not Here To Cooperate” form — word is that Chucky doesn’t want to go back to coaching this year because he wants to milk every penny from the Tampa Bay ownership — the ownership that fired him.

JMID does admire those who choose spite as an emotion to hold onto.  In fact, I’ve read that spite can be one of the most powerful emotions known to man.  It’s so pwerful its been documented to have kept people alive — just  to mess with their surviving kin.  That, my friends, is awesome.

So, hats off to Jon, I admire a man who’s willing to stand up for his principles — and make millions of dollars in the process.

Which takes us to the Brown’s apparent choice — a choice that might become official as sonn as this Thursday — Pat Shurmur.

Unlike Tim, I didn’t know much about him — so, like all good red blooded Americans my age, I “googled” him.  Here’s some tidbits:

Coached in the NFL since 1999 — first with Philly, where he was QB coach for the last five of those years, then in 2009 to the Rams as their offensive coordinator.

While coaching the QB’s in Philly, McNabb earned three of his five Pro Bowl appearances.

In 2009 with the Rams, his offense earned Steven Jackson a Pro Bowl berth.  Of curse, this year he coached Sam Bradford to a pretty good rookie year.

He’s known both Heckert and Holmgren for a long time — and, perhaps more importantly, they share the same agent.  So, not only are his credentials very good, having the same agent is a huge asset during these times in the NFL.

These aren’t news flashes to any of you reading this column, but just more proof that he’s a good fit, both on and off the field.  I guess we’ll find out soon enough, but as Tim pointed out yesterday — being a first year head coach isn’t all bad.  Having a strong history developing quarterbacks in the NFL isn’t all good either, but it’s pretty good indicator of future success.

So, if we can’t have Chucky, Pat Shurmur sounds good to me.

Holla at MNF — Gruden’s film sessions on the bus are great

Meanwhile, I’ll just say “Come on down to C-Town, Pat Shurmur.  Your JMID nickname awaits you.”

If you’ve got a suggestion, send it my way.

Dad

January 2, 2011
Browns: Where Do We Go Now?

With the Browns taking a humiliating 41-9 dive against the Steelers today, the second consecutive 5-11 Browns season comes to a close. It seems all but certain that we’ve seen the end of the Eric Mangini era, as well.

The question is: what now?

I’m not going to spend time speculating who the next coach will be. Peter King reported on Football Night in America tonight that he expects it to be Philadelphia OC Marty Mornhinweg, owner of a sterling 5-27 record as a head coach with the Lions. I would consider this a less than inspiring choice, but since it’s still speculation, it’s worthless for me to go any deeper into it than that.

Instead, I turn briefly to, on some level, the only question that matters on the personnel front. 

Colt McCoy’s last two games—this week even moreso than last—really muddy the waters in terms of whether or not he’s a legitimate NFL QB. His numbers today were horrid: 20/41, 209 YDS, 1 garbage time TD, 3 prime-time INTs (though admittedly the first INT was more Ben Watson’s fault than McCoy’s). His performance against the Ravens wasn’t a lot better.

The result is that it’s now entirely unclear to me whether these are the (almost) inevitable growing pains of a long-term solution at QB, or the first signs that another mirage is evaporating. Remember, Derek Anderson went to the Pro Bowl in 2007.

This uncertainty becomes the central question surrounding the Browns’ offseason. We’ve written it over and over again, but the NFL is no longer in an era where a “game manager” like Trent Dilfer can steer a team to the Lombardi trophy. Every 2010 playoff team has a quarterback who is a serious offensive threat. That means that if McCoy can’t sling his way to wins, Tom Heckert and Mike Holmgren need to find someone who can.

Based on record, the Browns will have either the 5th or 6th pick in the 2011 draft. The early draft ratings that I’ve seen exclude all QBs but Andrew Luck from the top 10. Assuming they can’t get Luck—who, by the way, isn’t even certain to leave Stanford for the draft yet—it seems the Browns will have a clear path to either an impact pass-rusher or wide receiver, two positions where the team is still severely lacking.

The question thus becomes, do they reach and spin the roulette wheel on a QB prospect like Cam Newton or Ryan Mallett? Or do they shore up one of their other positions of need with a surer thing?

I wish I had the answer. Even moreso, I wish everyone knew I had the answer and would pay me for it. But that ain’t the case.

I’m not ready to say that McCoy is absolutely not the guy. But I’m also not ready to proclaim that the team brass doesn’t need to have a serious plan B in place. Even with more talent surrounding the quarterback, though, if the Browns’ front office choose incorrectly, we fans of the team will be in this same position in another year—paying less attention to the playoff brackets than the draft boards.

-T

November 30, 2010
McCoy or … Mangini?

It started as soon as Jake Delhomme threw his first interception of the game: Browns fans all around Northeast Ohio started pining for the return of good old boy Colt McCoy. 

Then yesterday, during his Monday press conference, head coach Eric Mangini - in a move that should shock absolutely no one - was noncommittal when asked which quarterback would start on Sunday against the Bills. In fact, Mangini went so far as to imply that Delhomme, McCoy, or even Seneca Wallace could see the playing field.

Hey, if it makes the Bills coaches prepare for an extra 30 minutes it’s worth it to Mangini. The coach needs wins to keep his job. And if the rest of this season has been any indication, there is a high probability that game #12 could be decided by a small margin (for the record, the Browns are -13 on the season, or 17th in the NFL).

Every miniscule advantage counts. With that in mind, Browns fans should give some consideration to the following debate…

What’s better for the future of this football team? More reps for Colt McCoy or more victories for Eric Mangini? 

We all know that Mangini is going to play whoever he thinks will give him the best chance to win. The man wants to keep his job. At the same time, any additional victories really don’t mean anything to the organization, which is firmly in talent evaluation mode. More importantly, McCoy needs the practice. Of course, no one wants to risk a significant injury to a young promising player, but if the doctors sign off on McCoy being healthy, I can’t fathom a scenario in which the Browns front office would not want McCoy taking as many snaps as possible. 

Yet, for those of us who want to see the franchise succeed in the long term, there is another issue at hand. And that is Mangini’s future. Are the Browns better off with or without Mangini? Theoretically, if it takes McCoy losing some reps over the next few games to get Mangini a couple more wins - and a reprieve for next season - is it worth it? 

I find myself feeling uncertain about Mangini as a coach. While we have seen some progress on the field, how much of that is due to the vision of Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert is difficult for an outsider to judge. I’m not in the locker room. I’ve never been to Berea (except for that one time that I got drunk at Baldwin-Wallace). I don’t feel qualified to assess the work that Mangini and his staff have done.

Generally speaking, I am in favor of consistency though. When you’re building something, change often looks a lot better before it happens than after it happens. Organizations thrive when individuals are empowered to make mistakes, solicit feedback, and ultimately grow. In that sense, keeping Mangini could be beneficial.

Obviously, none of us know what Mike Holmgren or Tom Heckert are thinking. It may, for example, be too simplistic of an approach to retain or fire Mangini based solely on the team’s number of wins. In fact, I would argue that fixing an arbitrary win total to job security is relatively barbarian - if Heckert and Holmgren think Mangini can coach, whether the team wins 5, 6, 7, or 8 games shouldn’t make a whole hell of a lot of difference. 

The last I checked, after all, Mangini wasn’t in the secondary missing tackles. 

Ultimately, Mangini’s fate will likely be determined by factors none of us are privy to. Which is how it should be. Which is also why, I suspect, McCoy will get the reps if he’s healthy. Who’s to say playing the rookie and developing for the future doesn’t actually give the Browns the best chance to win now anyway?