Rope symbolized Savage’s tenure

By Sean McClelland | Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 10:15 AM

Haven’t been there in a while so I don’t know if it still hangs ominously in the vestibule of team headquarters. But it was always good for a laugh as you entered.

Ex-Browns GM Phil Savage had a length of knotted rope dangling there as a means of encouraging players and other employees to pull together. In an accompanying note taped to a window, he explained that everyone should become a “knot” in the rope and that, by so doing, the team could climb to great heights. Like in gym class, I guess.

Another rope (and note) swung outside the team’s locker room at Cleveland Browns Stadium. So, everywhere they turned, players were confronted with ropes, which had to be somewhat disconcerting, especially given the lack of climbing that was going on in the standings.

Savage had some quirkiness to him, that’s for sure. You can get away with some of this stuff if you win, but when your four-year record as a GM is 24-40, you tend to look kind of foolish.

There were doubts about Savage when the Browns hired him, but I took his side, as did most people, when factions in the front office wanted to run him out of town after a year.

What surprised me, other than his suspect drafting, is how badly Savage handled certain situations.

An early example came during training camp in 2006 when he completely overreacted to being hit with a few questions from reporters a day or two after the first exhibition game. Such queries can be tedious, but these were softballs, and instead of deftly dodging them or, heaven forbid, answering them, he basically flew off the handle. I remember standing there holding a tape recorder, smiling and thinking, “Phil, this is Cleveland. You might work in New York someday. Get a grip.”

To my knowledge, I’m the only one who wrote about Savage’s mini-meltdown that day, earning a stern rebuke from a member of the PR department. To me it was newsworthy because it provided a clue to who this guy was.

What we learned over time was that being out front, being the face of an organization, was not a Savage strong suit.

There was the time he told an audience in Canton that NFL players who believe in Jesus last longer in the league. Who knows? Maybe he did a study. But the Browns were so embarrassed by the comment that they (he?) had it removed from a story on their Web site. I mean, literally it was there one day and gone the next.

Of course, those Savage gaffes were merely precursors to this season’s, which included the Kellen Winslow non-suspension suspension and the infamous f* you e-mail to a fan while he sat on the team bus in Buffalo.

Now the Browns are considering bringing in another general manager, like Savage, who has never been a general manager before. Hope they know what they’re doing.

Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment

Please, no more rookie GMs, coaches

By Sean McClelland | Monday, December 29, 2008, 04:26 PM

Four wasted years.

That’s what the Phil Savage/Romeo Crennel experiment essentially produced for the Cleveland Browns.

Monday morning, owner Randy Lerner would not even address the fans directly; he refused to allow cameras, or even tape recorders, in his press conference. Who is this guy, Howard Hughes?

So you won’t hear any sound bites from the man himself. Won’t be able to tune in on the Internet and listen to how the owner of your favorite football team plans to turn this mess around and make you want to buy tickets and merchandise again.

Of course, he probably has no idea how he plans to turn this mess around, which is the truly scary part. Fans, of course, deserve better than this guy’s approach and disdain.

As for Savage, he just made too many public mistakes to be taken seriously as the face of the franchise. And with Lerner in hiding most of the time, somebody had to be the face, and so it ended up being Crennel, which was fine, except for when it came time for Savage to be out front and Crennel was left to clean up after him.

Even Savage’s personnel evaluation, supposedly his strength and the reason he got the job in the first place, proved suspect. In Baltimore, he had been praised for spotting those second-day gems on draft day and turning them into productive Ravens. He failed to bring that vision to Cleveland, apparently.

As for Crennel, he was the nicest guy you’d want to meet, but when it came time to doing the job of a head coach on game day, he struggled. And I’m not sure way, considering he’s been around forever. It could be that he, like Savage, was in his role for the first time.

And this notion that somehow Crennel needs to stick around in another capacity, maybe as defensive coordinator, needs to be shouted down immediately. Put it this way. In the five seasons Crennel has had anything to do with this team (including 2000 when he was defensive coordinator), the Browns’ record is 27 wins, 53 losses.

So, at the very least, fans should demand of Lerner that he install a general manager and coach who have actually done this type of work in the past. That should not be too much to ask.

Enough of this on-the-job training already.

Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment

What about Billick if Cowher says no?

By Sean McClelland | Monday, December 22, 2008, 01:21 PM

Win one for Romeo? Yeah, right

With friends/players like these, Romeo Crennel doesn’t need any enemies.

Not to say the Browns laid down on the job or that they intentionally didn’t play hard in Sunday’s awful 14-0 loss to the woeful Bengals, but you couldn’t blame anybody for thinking that way in light of that dismal performance in their home finale.

So they’re going to finish 4-12 after the Steelers get through with them Sunday and then owner Randy Lerner will huddle with his trusted advisers, Jim Brown and the rest, and figure out what to do next.

I think he’ll end up keeping General Manager Phil Savage in place, dumping Crennel and hiring one of the out-of-work coaches as opposed to a rising coordinator/assistant or college coach.

My bet is that the new coach won’t be Marty Schottenheimer or Bill Cowher, but Brian Billick, the former Baltimore Ravens coach with a Super Bowl win on his record and, presumably, the desire to get back in the game after spending some time in the Fox broadcast booth.

Expect to see Jim Fassel pop up, too, as a candidate. He’s also had some success in the league, taking the New York Giants to the Super Bowl the year the Ravens beat them.

Savage knows Billick from their days in Baltimore, so it makes sense on that level. And at least you would have a head coach with a history of NFL winning as opposed to throwing darts at current assistants hoping to hit on the next Mike Smith or John Harbaugh.

Billick interviewed to become the Browns’ first head coach when they came back into the league, but he really wasn’t interested because he suspected what would happen, that the team would win about five games those first two seasons (which the Browns did) and that the head coach (who turned out to be Chris Palmer) would be fired (which he was) by panicky management.

After a year away, Billick likely is motivated to return and, assuming Brady Quinn lives up to his billing eventually, he’ll have a quarterback, the lack of which was his undoing in Baltimore.

It just seems like Billick would be an easier sell than some anonymous assistant, especially if Cowher lands elsewhere or can’t be convinced to rescue this sinking ship.

Permalink | Comments (18) | Post your comment

Doesn’t look like Marty sees a gleam

By Sean McClelland | Monday, December 8, 2008, 03:54 PM

Here’s a transcript of what Marty Schottenheimer said on Serius Satellite Radio today on his show:

Schottenheimer responded to a caller who asked if he would ever consider going back to Cleveland.

Schottenheimer: “I don’t ever say ‘never’ if I don’t have to but I don’t see it (going back to coach the Cleveland Browns) as being likely.”

SIRIUS NFL Radio host, Adam Schein: “Marty, let’s get into this for a quick sec because I see the same [report] that everybody else is seeing. Are you in the mix to coach the Cleveland Browns? I think you just answered the question but why don’t you set the record straight?”

Schottenheimer: “I don’t see that as being likely at all. I really don’t. I’ve made a major change in my life and, again, the only thing I always say, Adam, as a caveat, I don’t ever make a decision if I don’t have to and thus I haven’t made one. First of all, nobody has presented me with an overture and, secondly, I’ve kind of aligned myself and my life kind of where it is and if they want to pay me $30 million a year I’ll have to talk about it. (laughs) But actually you couldn’t even take the $30 million because we need it for the government so we can get out of this financial crisis we’re in. I have not spoken to anybody from there and the likelihood is, if indeed I were to, I don’t see it [as being] likely.”

Schein asked if there is still an urge to get back into the league and whether his last experience in San Diego might have any bearing on any possible decision to pursue potential opportunities.

Schottenheimer: “That was an anomaly. That was an aberration. That was particular to the organization. I don’t sit here today saying, ‘Boy, I really got a bad deal.’ I swear I don’t ever stop and think about it in that context. It is what it is, it was what it was and it happens. I’m a football junkie. There’s no doubt about that. I am a football junkie. I sit down, as I said, in the morning and have breakfast and get ready for the games and I’m up ‘til the final [whistle]. I enjoy it. But that doesn’t put me necessarily in a situation where I want to stand there and have every moment that I’m there, making decisions and all. The key for me is people, as you well know. That is the most important thing in the world to me. My issues in San Diego were because of the people in the front office that I could not interact with.”

Schein: “If you took another coaching job would you need complete control?”

Schottenheimer: “Well, no. I don’t think that that’s necessary. I had complete control in Washington and it didn’t work out very well. (laughs) No, those are not issues that are critical in my mind. As a head coach I think you have to be responsible and have control at least of the 53-man roster.

To be responsible for the draft, in my opinion, I don’t think that’s the kind of situation, it’s too hard to do what you have to do let alone be involved making all the final decisions on the draft because, as a head coach in the National Football League, to do that job well (running the draft) I think you’ve got to be out on the road doing it all the time and, duh, if you’re out there how are you going to get ready to coach your football team? It’s just like the thing I enjoy most about working with you guys (at SIRIUS) are the people. The people are good people and that’s the only thing that is important to me, is people.”

Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment

Schottenheimer? Really?

By Sean McClelland | Monday, December 8, 2008, 03:10 PM

You can’t go back in time. Believe me, I’ve tried.

So forget this nonsense about bringing back Marty Schottenheimer as head coach of this football team. But how about team president? He could serve in a Bill Parcells-like capacity, calling the shots from upstairs.

That would probably mean re-assigning General Manager Phil Savage or losing him completely, and I don’t think they should give up on him completely, so maybe such a role wouldn’t work.

Head coach, though? Can’t see it. Wouldn’t pull that trigger.

Saw a Schottenheimer poll on a Web site and about 40 percent of those responding were in favor of giving him a call if something can’t be worked out with Bill Cowher to be head coach. About one-third unconditionally said “yes” to Schottenheimer and the rest responded with a resounding no.

No. No. No. Can I make it any clearer?

Then again, why not?

What this team lacks is toughness, generally, and Schottenheimer is good at instilling that quality. And the Browns definitely will need to find the biggest name they can for this job, and since Jimmy Johnson isn’t coming out of the TV studio and Cowher’s interest is iffy, the idea has some merit, I guess.

One thing is clear: Romeo Crennel’s tenure as an NFL head coach has three games remaining. Even announcers are taking shots at him. Did you hear Dan Fouts and the great Don Criqui rip him on TV during Sunday’s latest dismal defeat?

Hello 5-11. And that’s only if they beat the Bengals in two weeks, because they’re not going into Philly and winning on Monday night, nor Pittsburgh (assuming the Steelers are still playing for something at that point).

It’s clear that Crennel has given up. How else to explain his not challenging the sideline play in which Braylon Edwards appeared to get both feet down but was ruled out of bounds? Maybe someone upstairs was asleep at the switch, but it looked bad. Not as bad as three games without an offensive touchdown, but pretty bad nonetheless.

And don’t look for Schottenheimer to solve your offensive problems. His offensive coordinator in San Diego was Cam Cameron, don’t forget. That’s where any innovation came from there. Schottenheimer is many things, but he’s about as innovative as Crennel when it comes to offense, as we know from his previous — and largely successful — stint as head coach of the Browns.

But there is that toughness thing and how Schottenheimer’s teams usually find a way to contend, even though he’s never been able to win the big one.

Hmmm. OK, maybe I’m a maybe. Maybe Randy Lerner should have his number handy just in case.

Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment

Yes, it’s that Lance Moore

By Sean McClelland | Tuesday, December 2, 2008, 04:30 PM

If you’re a fan of this team, there’s a whole lot more to be depressed about than a 4-8 record.

How about some of the personnel decisions over the years? And not just drafting Gerard Warren over LaDainian Tomlinson or Richard Seymour in 2001. Or William Green over Ed Reed the next year.

While those decisions likely deprived the team of two future Hall of Famers, and while GM Phil Savage has followed that up by whiffing on some picks of his own, it’s the less obvious missteps that are truly coming back to haunt this team.

Case in point: Lance Moore, wide receiver, New Orleans Saints. He’s their leading receiver, favorite target of prolific quarterback Drew Brees. The Browns had Moore in training camp a few years back but couldn’t find a way to keep him. Now he’s a latter-day Keenan McCardell, who until now had been the poster child for receivers who couldn’t make it in Cleveland but flourished elsewhere.

Sure, there’s no guarantee Moore would have blossomed with the Browns, but he’s every bit as “local” as Brady Quinn, being from Columbus and playing at Toledo. And what hurts most is that the Browns were the ones who gave him his first shot, bringing him in as an undrafted college free agent, and apparently didn’t realize what they had.

What they had, it turns out, was decidedly better than Frisman Jackson, an undrafted college free agent who took up space on the roster for a couple of years while doing very little.

Then there’s Jeff Faine. He’s the Notre Dame center drafted by Butch Davis in the first round in 2003 (ahead of guard Eric Steinbach, who the Browns later acquired in free agency). It was eventually determined that Faine was too small for the position at 6-foot-3, 291 pounds, which led to the signing of LeCharles Bentley in free agency.

Nothing against Bentley. He was perhaps the best center in the game at the time, and who could have envisioned him going down with a knee injury in training camp and never playing again. Just a terrible break.

But Faine, traded to New Orleans on draft day 2006, hasn’t exactly faded away. He’s starting for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, has been a Pro Bowl alternate and was recently lauded by the Pro Football Writers Association as a mid-season all-star. Too small? That’s as ridiculous now as it sounded then.

Then, of course, there’s Shaun O’Hara, another center deemed unworthy. He’s now the center for the Super Bowl-champion New York Giants, anchoring what is widely regarded as the NFL’s best offensive line. And he has a Super Bowl ring.

The lesson here, of course, is this: No matter who the coach is, nothing sinks an organization faster than personnel decisions that don’t work out, and the Browns have made plenty in all aspects of the player-procurement process in recent years.

Permalink | Comments (13) | Post your comment

No hugs for Romeo this year

By Sean McClelland | Wednesday, November 26, 2008, 06:22 PM

A year ago, after the Browns magically won 10 games, a female Cleveland TV reporter hugged head coach Romeo Crennel after his season-ending press conference.

Awwww … so cute.

How times have changed.

There are no hugs for Crennel this season, only pointed questions, and he’s not doing so well with those, it seems.

Latest example came at today’s press conference when Crennel appears to have cracked under the strain of the notoriously tame Cleveland media in regard to the quarterback question.

With Brady Quinn out for the rest of the season with his finger injury and Derek Anderson replacing him by default, Crennel said it doesn’t matter what Anderson does the rest of the way, that Quinn is his starter next year regardless.

Tom Withers of the Associated Press wrote it this way:

In a stunning comment, coach Romeo Crennel, who may not be back next season, said Quinn will be his starter going into training camp in 2009.

“D.A. was the starter, you guys hated him,” Crennel said to reporters. “Quinn goes in and plays and now you’re telling me if D.A. lights it up, you want him to be the starter. I have decided that Quinn is going to be the starter. I’m sorry if you don’t like that.”

Cracking under the pressure. It’s as simple as that.

Permalink | Comments (6) | Post your comment