Although a lot of Browns fans are excited by the possibility that Colt McCoy could finally be The Guy,a lot of analysts have agreed that there’s a dark shadow hovering over him. People love his leadership. They love his work ethic. They love his intelligence and the way he performed under pressure. But from Tony Grossi onward, the word is that McCoy’s arm strength is “a concern” moving forward.
This notion irritates the hell out of me. Not because I’m blindly onboard with Colt McCoy, but because one of my pet peeves in sports is the tendency for people to believe that as soon as an athlete begins his second year, his strengths and weaknesses are frozen in place. He will never become significantly better at anything than what he already is. It’s as if a timer gets started on the day the athlete is drafted, and as soon as it goes off a couple of years later, the cement has set.
I’ll admit that by and large, huge improvements are not the norm. (Holland, feel free to jump in and drop some knowledge on the remarkable year-to-year consistency in NBA players’ stats.) However, if you’re looking at the right types of athletes, you can find plenty of examples of major strides being made.
For instance, let’s switch sports briefly. Steve Nash’s FT% for 2 of his first 3 years in the NBA was ~82.5%. In year 4, he improved to 88.2% and has never dropped below that rate in the succeeding 11 years. In fact, he’s shot 90% or better in 8 of those 11 years.
Returning to the NFL, Drew Brees showed similarly significant statistical improvement a few years into his professional career. In his first three seasons in the league, Brees’ completion percentages were 55.6%, 60.8%, and 57.6% respectively. In his fourth year, his completion percentage jumped to 65.5%. From year 4 to the present, his average annual completion percentage is 66.5%, and his worst year in that span is a still-impressive 64.3%.
What do these two athletes share in common? They were both undersized. Neither was born with the type of overwhelming athleticism that you’d see in, say, LeBron or Mike Vick. And both are renowned for their incredible hard work and dedication to the game.
All of these characteristics are (supposedly) true of Colt McCoy as well.
However, people may look at FT% in basketball and completion % in the NFL and say that those are somehow different than arm strength. They’re about skill and precision, not brute force. Learned, not innate qualities.
Somehow, arm strength is just regarded as being different.
But this past Monday, NFL correspondent Michael Lombardi wrote a column praising Aaron Rodgers. This, in itself, is not special, as the sports media has now universally agreed that Rodgers is The Next Great Quarterback. Even casual NFL fans have elevated him to elite status. In fact, I’m fairly certain that there are babies all over Wisconsin who have delayed trying to crawl so that they can learn to do Rodgers’s “championship belt” gesture instead.
What makes Lombardi’s column worth mentioning in this context is the following passage:
The one noticeable area of improvement from his time in college to now is his arm strength. He never displayed this type of rocket or the ability to throw the ball from every angle. He had a good arm, now he has a powerful arm. Part of the reason for the increased velocity is that in college he…appeared as if the weight room was for linemen, not quarterbacks. Now he looks like he enjoys the weight room and has made his meek body into one that can take a hit and drive the football.
This officially marks the first time that I have ever seen a respectable NFL analyst make the argument that a quarterback’s arm strength can be significantly improved once he reaches the pro ranks. In other words, thanks to Lombardi, I can now point to a highly regarded expert who shares my opinion that this arm strength conundrum is garbage.
Does this mean that I believe a 90 lb chess champ could transform himself into a guy who can throw a football through a bank vault the way Rodgers can? Not necessarily, no. I think there’s some level of proficiency in a specialized field like this that can’t be acquired artificially. But I do believe that it means a pro athlete can go from being decent at something to being very good to great at that same thing—provided he really, truly goes after it.
Clearly, McCoy has some arm strength already. He wouldn’t have been a 4 year starter at Texas and a third round pick in the NFL (Holmgren’s quarterback-induced hard-on aside) if he didn’t. The question becomes, will he have the dedication and work ethic to make the same types of serious improvements that players like Nash, Brees, and Rodgers have made? If so, the Browns may truly have a solution at the QB spot. If not, then it’s back to the drawing board again.
But for now, take some comfort in the fact that Aaron Rodgers has shown that the arm strength issue is not, in fact, genetic-or-bust.
The Browns are set to interview current Giants’ defensive coordinator Perry Fewell today, but according to sources such as Peter King, Rams’ offensive coordinator Pat Shurmur is the current favorite for the job.
This is not news in and of itself. I won’t bother listing out all the boxes Shurmur has checked; undoubtedly you’ve read that somewhere else by now. Suffice it to say that he has past relationships with both Holmgren and Heckert.
What’s notable, though, is what King tweeted earlier this morning in response to the question of who else was looking at Shurmur as a head coaching candidate. The answer was clear, concise, and unmistakable.
King simply wrote—and I quote—“No one.”
Now, there are two totally opposite ways to interpret this information. One is to conclude that the front office is being too heavily influenced by their past ties to Shurmur. Their judgment is being clouded by the fact that, on some level, they would really like Shurmur to be the real deal just because they like him as a person, even if there’s evidence that his professional chops are under-developed. As a result, they’re strongly considering elevating a guy who no one else in the league thinks is ready to take over head coaching duties.
However, the other way is to conclude that the front office is being influenced by their past ties just heavily enough to be able to see something about Shurmur that no other front office in the league right now does. In other words, because both Holmgren and Heckert have past personal and professional ties with him, they have inside knowledge that suggested to them that he was a more worthy candidate than anyone else did. So they took a flyer on interviewing him and—possibly to their own surprise—came away thoroughly impressed.
As we’ve discussed many times in the past, this is where GMs and Team Presidents really earn their keep: by identifying undervalued assets. This is true in any sport. It’s especially true in situations where franchises need to reshape themselves dramatically. Despite any improvements we can argue ourselves into seeing, the Browns are still such a franchise. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t have fired their old coach in the first place.
With that in mind, there’s certainly no reason to limit this thinking to personnel. The process of evaluating coaches is essentially identical. As I’ve written before, the AFC North is proof of that. Remember, there was no league-wide interest in Mike Tomlin when the Steelers hired him; to my recollection, he was brought in simply to fulfill the Rooney Rule requirement. Instead, he blew away the Rooneys themselves and now has a Super Bowl ring.
Similarly, the only reason John Harbaugh had the opportunity to even interview with Baltimore was that their first choice, Jason Garrett, rejected the Ravens’ contract offer in favor of staying as a Cowboys assistant. It was the only interview that John got. At this rate, though, his may be the last head coaching interview the Ravens conduct this decade.
By no means am I saying that Pat Shurmur is definitely going to be a brilliant hire and a successful head coach in the NFL. What I am saying, though, is that Browns fans shouldn’t bring out the pitchforks if the front office ultimately hires a guy who no other franchise saw fit to interview.
To broad the perspective momentarily, too many people in life chase the cool and spar with one another for a hot candidate for anything, not necessarily because the person in question has actual substance, but because they believe someone else wants to him/her first. This is true in business, in the arts, in sports, in dating, in everything. The phenomenon will never change; it’s basic human nature.
However, those among us who have the ability to fight through the jealousy traps ultimately open themselves up to possibilities and advantages that the rest of the pack simply won’t see. It may be that Pat Shurmur is one such advantage. We may never find out. But instead of blasting Holmgren and Heckert for considering him, I think we should all, for the moment, keep in mind the possibilities of the undiscovered.
As the level of chatter around the Browns’ now-vacant head coaching position rises, there’s another way that Eric Mangini’s recent dismissal is significant for the organization.
Whatever its contents may be, from here on out Mike Holmgren is officially the man holding the bag.
Holmgren has been in his presidential role with the Browns for a little more than a year. But the 2010 season was a hybrid of sorts. Holmgren was steering the ship, but the ship itself and the staff onboard were inherited from someone else.
Holmgren kept Mangini on for a sophomore year, but Randy Lerner was the one who hired him in the first place. Mangini, in turn, had sole discretion over his coordinators and assistant coaches.
Holmgren installed Tom Heckert as the GM, but their dual imprint on the personnel was limited to one draft and a handful of free agent signings. The bulk of the players on this year’s team were still there thanks to Mangini.
This situation created a sizable safety net for Holmgren. Mangini was still the head coach; Mangini was still responsible for the coaching staff; and Mangini was still the mastermind behind most of the roster. Everyone knew this, from the fans to the journalists.
So when the team nose-dived yet again, where was the criticism directed? Mangini. It seemed like this was the case even when a player brought in under Holmgren’s watch—specifically, Jake Delhomme—could be singled out as a prime reason for some of the team’s more disappointing losses.
In jettisoning Mangini, Holmgren has essentially thrown away his flak jacket. From the front office to the sidelines to the center of the field, the team is now completely his.
We’re already seeing the consequences of this new reality. Even after the Ravens game in week 16, fans and local sports personalities were clamoring for Holmgren to come down from the owner’s box and take up the play-call sheet again. When he announced in his press conference on Monday that that wasn’t going to happen (for now), the backlash began. When the new head coach is actually hired, it’ll continue, even if the choice is a superstar name like Jon Gruden (who, by the way, I am not endorsing). It’ll build even more violently if the selection is a current assistant with a previous and disastrous head coaching stint on his resume (see: Mike Mularkey, Marty Mornhinweg).
When will it end? In the two months between the Browns’ first Super Bowl win and the following season’s draft. Anything else is fair game for Cleveland sports fanatics. As evidence, I will always remember reading a Plain Dealer online “Cavs comment of the day” from the 2008-2009 season where the reader proclaimed the squad to be “the worst 65-win team [he’d] ever seen.” Yes, it was about a different sport, but the mentality here is the same regardless of the shape of the ball—and in most cases, regardless of whether we’re talking about Cleveland or any other sports city in America. People just dig complaining and criticizing.
The reality is that everyone living vicariously through the Browns’ performance will be satisfied with nothing less than perfection. I doubt Holmgren is a stranger to this concept. He did suffer through some hard times in Seattle when he was performing the dual duties of coach and GM, after all. I assume that he’s ready for the angry mob to take aim at him again now that he has a blank organizational slate to work with.
Even though Holmgren has already been on the job for a year, he truly starts earning his paycheck now. Let’s see how he does.
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.
