Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Please, Jimmy Haslam, fire Shurmur now
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cleveland Browns
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Should Haslam fire Shurmur now?
Yes
52%
 52%  [ 24 ]
No
45%
 45%  [ 21 ]
Other, and why?
2%
 2%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 46

Author Message
TeHDruiD


Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Posts: 7069
Location: Canton, OH
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The thing that drives me nuts are the 3rd down plays where our players don't run their routes to the markers. I realize in most plays you have players on routes that don't go that far, but I'm talking about the Little route for example. Either he's missing it between the ears, or the coaches aren't preaching to run their routes for a first down

I feel like it's the same thing every year too, no matter the coach. Is this on the coaches or the players? I'm to the point where I'd rather see a deep bomb on 3rd down get INT'd instead of seeing a route ran 2 or 3 yards short of the first down markers

While watching the game I also felt like Rich Gannon was being a jerk about our offense, but after thinking about it a bit and watching play after play where what Gannon was talking about was completely right. This isn't on the coaches, but more on Weeden. His first read was wide open so many times and he abandoned it. He's still learning so it doesn't bother me quite as much, but the fact that he can't see his first read running wide open blows my mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TeHDruiD


Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Posts: 7069
Location: Canton, OH
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On the topic of firing the coach, I agree with those who feel firing Shurmur now won't do any good. I believe regardless of if we had won out Shurmur would be gone. I feel like Haslam and Banner already have a candidate or 2 they're banking on

Everyone see's the talent starting to add up, so I think coaches will want to come here because of that. Regardless of what philosphy that coach brings, their is enough universal talent on this roster along with an offseason where we're going to have a high 1st round pick and plenty of cap space to try to acquire some FA's to further augment it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TeHDruiD wrote:
The thing that drives me nuts are the 3rd down plays where our players don't run their routes to the markers. I realize in most plays you have players on routes that don't go that far, but I'm talking about the Little route for example. Either he's missing it between the ears, or the coaches aren't preaching to run their routes for a first down

I feel like it's the same thing every year too, no matter the coach. Is this on the coaches or the players? I'm to the point where I'd rather see a deep bomb on 3rd down get INT'd instead of seeing a route ran 2 or 3 yards short of the first down markers

While watching the game I also felt like Rich Gannon was being a jerk about our offense, but after thinking about it a bit and watching play after play where what Gannon was talking about was completely right. This isn't on the coaches, but more on Weeden. His first read was wide open so many times and he abandoned it. He's still learning so it doesn't bother me quite as much, but the fact that he can't see his first read running wide open blows my mind


I agree. Weeden has the lion's share of the blame for the lack of offense in that game. The Ravens defense really is pretty good, but it seemed like we had decent opportunities to move the ball that were clearly missed by Weeden in the 1st quarter.

Later, he made some good reads too, but then would follow up with bad decisions in the red zone. However, I must say that inconsistent play is not unusual for a rookie QB.

At some point it would be nice to see him adjust players that are lined up wrong, or make better adjustments to pressure.

I do like that he took a few of those last 2-3 sacks instead of forcing the ball somehwere, or running backward. But he also could have seen the pressure coming and made adjustements to the blocking and/or the play. I think that is the next step in his development.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cortes02


Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 2101
Location: Unknown
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I apologize if this idea has already been discussed but a caller on 92.3 The Fan brought this up last night. What if the Browns fire Shurmer and make Holmgren the interim coach? Holmgren is already retiring at the end of the year so perhaps he would want to go out swinging as coach of the Browns. At the end of the year, Holmgren retires so there isn't the awkward firing of any other interim coach such as Juron. I thought it was an interesting idea.

Peace!!
_________________

Sig By Kempes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Estonianzulu


Moderator
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 26852
Location: Middle of Nowhere VA
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cortes02 wrote:
I apologize if this idea has already been discussed but a caller on 92.3 The Fan brought this up last night. What if the Browns fire Shurmer and make Holmgren the interim coach? Holmgren is already retiring at the end of the year so perhaps he would want to go out swinging as coach of the Browns. At the end of the year, Holmgren retires so there isn't the awkward firing of any other interim coach such as Juron. I thought it was an interesting idea.

Peace!!


What would that do? A half-interested coach is worse than a young one. At least with Shurmur he has the potential to get better, to learn and to improve. What would Holmgren do except give it half the effort that Shurmur does?

I'd rather have someone in over their head trying really really had than someone disinterested and on the way out.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DawgX


Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 11014
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's the point in firing him now? I am not even totally convinced that he should be fired at the end of the season, either. Teams give up on coaches far too early in this league.

Look at the Texans - Nearly all of their fans wanted Kubiak fired and he had much more time and experienced talent to work with than Shurmur. But their owner stuck it out with him and look how good Houston is now. I bet all of their fans are glad the owner didn't listen to them and instead stuck with Kubiak.

Not many head coaches would be successful with such an inexperienced roster. Does Shurmur have his faults? Definitely, but he could possibly improve on them. I mean, I feel he's improved a lot just since last season. A lot of Cleveland's struggles come from poor execution from the players and that's mainly due to the lack of experience this team has. Once they gain more experience and a little more talent is added to the roster, then I think Shurmur could prove to be a good head coach.

I won't be disappointed if he is fired as long as the Browns' new head coach is someone I like. However, I won't be too upset if he's kept on for at least another year.
_________________
Cleveland Browns Forum Hall of Fame Inductee



Smack on the sig.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TeHDruiD


Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Posts: 7069
Location: Canton, OH
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DawgX wrote:
What's the point in firing him now? I am not even totally convinced that he should be fired at the end of the season, either. Teams give up on coaches far too early in this league.


Sadly it's the nature of the business. When new ownership takes over or a new GM takes over, they want their own guys. Basically for the coach who is currently there at the time of the change, he has no other choice but to go to the playoff and kind of force them to keep them. I don't agree with it either, but they feel if the guy currently running things can't get the job done, then they'll get someone who they think can

In the case of the Texans, new ownership never took place so the owner/GM stuck with Kubiak. Had someone new came in, they likely would have canned him
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DawgX


Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 11014
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TeHDruiD wrote:
DawgX wrote:
What's the point in firing him now? I am not even totally convinced that he should be fired at the end of the season, either. Teams give up on coaches far too early in this league.


Sadly it's the nature of the business. When new ownership takes over or a new GM takes over, they want their own guys. Basically for the coach who is currently there at the time of the change, he has no other choice but to go to the playoff and kind of force them to keep them. I don't agree with it either, but they feel if the guy currently running things can't get the job done, then they'll get someone who they think can

In the case of the Texans, new ownership never took place so the owner/GM stuck with Kubiak. Had someone new came in, they likely would have canned him


I realize this. Even if there wasn't a new owner, most Browns fans would want Shurmur gone. All I'm saying is that fans give up on coaches too soon. And I brought up Houston and Kubiak as an example.
_________________
Cleveland Browns Forum Hall of Fame Inductee



Smack on the sig.


Last edited by DawgX on Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TeHDruiD


Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Posts: 7069
Location: Canton, OH
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DawgX wrote:
I realize this. Even if their wasn't a new owner, most Browns fans would want Shurmur gone. All I'm saying is that fans give up on coaches too soon. And I brought up Houston and Kubiak as an example.


Yeah I hear ya and I agree. I think it amplifies for the Browns because of all of the failure we've been through over the last 13 years. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but it's rough seeing us fail year in and year out. I guess the difference for me is I understand some of the current failure and it doesn't fall on the coach, whereas a lot of others are just ready for the next big thing. Heck I can't even fault them, we've become a laughing stock and it'd be nice to finally get to live some of the pride some of our older members got to witness. I was too young back in the glory days, I wasn't really old enough to understand football until 1999 and imagine it's the same for you

I'm with you though, I don't care one way or the other. Part of me thinks Shurmur has the ability to be a good coach given some experience from his current players, but part of me doesn't want to be stuck in mediocrity for a few more years if he is as inept as a lot of people feel he is
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DawgX


Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 11014
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TeHDruiD wrote:
DawgX wrote:
I realize this. Even if their wasn't a new owner, most Browns fans would want Shurmur gone. All I'm saying is that fans give up on coaches too soon. And I brought up Houston and Kubiak as an example.


Yeah I hear ya and I agree. I think it amplifies for the Browns because of all of the failure we've been through over the last 13 years. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but it's rough seeing us fail year in and year out. I guess the difference for me is I understand some of the current failure and it doesn't fall on the coach, whereas a lot of others are just ready for the next big thing. Heck I can't even fault them, we've become a laughing stock and it'd be nice to finally get to live some of the pride some of our older members got to witness. I was too young back in the glory days, I wasn't really old enough to understand football until 1999 and imagine it's the same for you

I'm with you though, I don't care one way or the other. Part of me thinks Shurmur has the ability to be a good coach given some experience from his current players, but part of me doesn't want to be stuck in mediocrity for a few more years if he is as inept as a lot of people feel he is


Well said. I'm tired of losing too but becoming a consistently good team doesn't happen over night. Again, just look at the Texans. I feel this team is headed in the right direction and this is definitely the most talented team the Browns have had since returning. We just have to wait until this team grows together.

I feel the same way about Shurmur. Part of me wants him to stay but part of me wouldn't care if he's fired. I just feel that some Browns fans might want him fired for different reasons. If given time, he might be a good head coach and that's why part of me wants him to stay. I mean, the offense looks significantly better than it did last year and the offense likely isn't even close to reaching its potential. Some of the improvements are due to having better players, but I'm sure some of it has to due with coaching.

Then again, he might not prove to be a good head coach and that's why I'd be okay with him being fired as long as the new head coach is someone I like.
_________________
Cleveland Browns Forum Hall of Fame Inductee



Smack on the sig.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big poppa pump


Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 1911
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DawgX wrote:
TeHDruiD wrote:
DawgX wrote:
I realize this. Even if their wasn't a new owner, most Browns fans would want Shurmur gone. All I'm saying is that fans give up on coaches too soon. And I brought up Houston and Kubiak as an example.


Yeah I hear ya and I agree. I think it amplifies for the Browns because of all of the failure we've been through over the last 13 years. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but it's rough seeing us fail year in and year out. I guess the difference for me is I understand some of the current failure and it doesn't fall on the coach, whereas a lot of others are just ready for the next big thing. Heck I can't even fault them, we've become a laughing stock and it'd be nice to finally get to live some of the pride some of our older members got to witness. I was too young back in the glory days, I wasn't really old enough to understand football until 1999 and imagine it's the same for you

I'm with you though, I don't care one way or the other. Part of me thinks Shurmur has the ability to be a good coach given some experience from his current players, but part of me doesn't want to be stuck in mediocrity for a few more years if he is as inept as a lot of people feel he is


Well said. I'm tired of losing too but becoming a consistently good team doesn't happen over night. Again, just look at the Texans. I feel this team is headed in the right direction and this is definitely the most talented team the Browns have had since returning. We just have to wait until this team grows together.

I feel the same way about Shurmur. Part of me wants him to stay but part of me wouldn't care if he's fired. I just feel that some Browns fans might want him fired for different reasons. If given time, he might be a good head coach and that's why part of me wants him to stay. I mean, the offense looks significantly better than it did last year and the offense likely isn't even close to reaching its potential. Some of the improvements are due to having better players, but I'm sure some of it has to due with coaching.

Then again, he might not prove to be a good head coach and that's why I'd be okay with him being fired as long as the new head coach is someone I like.


I think you can change that to someone who wins. I would like anyone that could come in and get us to be consistent winners.
_________________

BIG UPS TO REG....DA MAN
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big poppa pump wrote:


I think you can change that to someone who wins. I would like anyone that could come in and get us to be consistent winners.


Of course it would be ideal if simply hiring the right coach instantly turned a team into winners, however that is not a realistic outcome.

The players play the games, not the coaches. And, typically, the players are more successful with more experience playing together.

For the sake of argument, let's say we get a new coach after this year and have success with largely the same players next year. In that event, it will be very likely that media and many fans will spin that outcome into resulting due to "better coaching". However, both history and logic suggests that, while coaching plays an important part in developing players, it is the actual improvement in the performance of the players during games that have the greatest impact on success.

Coaching certainly plays a significant role in providing the environment for improvement of the field, but not the most significant. Coaches can inspire players to play better, but that doesn't mean they will. The players themselves need to have the talent and the drive to improve before coaching could ever affect improvement. And even if coaching does manage to improve a player, there still remains the fact that each player must execute his role within a scheme that involves the proper execution of other players on each given play.

To simplify: to have a successful passing play you must have adequate pass blocking by several players, a QB that makes an adequate read and throw, and then a receiver that makes a catch.

I don't know of any team in football that coaches their players NOT to block, pass, or catch adequately. SO where does the difference come from? In my opinion it comes mostly from talent and experience, neither of which is coachable.

Right now the media is portraying the Colt's success as a tribute to the effect of inspirational coaching. However, let's not overlook the talent and experience they have on the OLine, DLine, and at the skill positions.

Did the Colt's go from 2-14 to now being 6-3 because of the coaching change? Not likely when you consider that they had less talent at QB which created a more limited playbook than even the current rookie has.

They still don't have much of a run game outside of Luck's 5 rushing TDs.

The truth is that when we really examine the turnaround of a bad team to a good team, it is usually due to the team already having talent and simply gaining more experience than it is to a coaching change. Not to say that coaching isn't important, it certainly is, but how important is it (or was it) for Reggie Wayne, Dwight Freeney and the like?

There is also a pretty significant "luck" component to a good turnaround as well.

The 49ers were 2-5 in 2008 when Nolan was replaced by Singletary. They finished 5-4. Then Singletary went 8-8 with a rookie QB, then he was fired when he went 5-10 in 2010. Now the 9ers fans all love Harbaugh as if he transformed the team himself. I guess they forgot that Alex Smith has been learning this whole time and has some good talent, as does some of those very good young defensive players that were still developing when Singletary was fired.

To summarize my thoughts: I don't think a coaching change will have dramatic impact of the success of the team either for the good or bad. But I also think that Shurmur can be just a good as anyone else we would get, so it may be better than risking a truly bad coach.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big poppa pump


Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 1911
PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Entropy wrote:
big poppa pump wrote:


I think you can change that to someone who wins. I would like anyone that could come in and get us to be consistent winners.


Of course it would be ideal if simply hiring the right coach instantly turned a team into winners, however that is not a realistic outcome.

The players play the games, not the coaches. And, typically, the players are more successful with more experience playing together.

For the sake of argument, let's say we get a new coach after this year and have success with largely the same players next year. In that event, it will be very likely that media and many fans will spin that outcome into resulting due to "better coaching". However, both history and logic suggests that, while coaching plays an important part in developing players, it is the actual improvement in the performance of the players during games that have the greatest impact on success.

Coaching certainly plays a significant role in providing the environment for improvement of the field, but not the most significant. Coaches can inspire players to play better, but that doesn't mean they will. The players themselves need to have the talent and the drive to improve before coaching could ever affect improvement. And even if coaching does manage to improve a player, there still remains the fact that each player must execute his role within a scheme that involves the proper execution of other players on each given play.

To simplify: to have a successful passing play you must have adequate pass blocking by several players, a QB that makes an adequate read and throw, and then a receiver that makes a catch.

I don't know of any team in football that coaches their players NOT to block, pass, or catch adequately. SO where does the difference come from? In my opinion it comes mostly from talent and experience, neither of which is coachable.

Right now the media is portraying the Colt's success as a tribute to the effect of inspirational coaching. However, let's not overlook the talent and experience they have on the OLine, DLine, and at the skill positions.

Did the Colt's go from 2-14 to now being 6-3 because of the coaching change? Not likely when you consider that they had less talent at QB which created a more limited playbook than even the current rookie has.

They still don't have much of a run game outside of Luck's 5 rushing TDs.

The truth is that when we really examine the turnaround of a bad team to a good team, it is usually due to the team already having talent and simply gaining more experience than it is to a coaching change. Not to say that coaching isn't important, it certainly is, but how important is it (or was it) for Reggie Wayne, Dwight Freeney and the like?

There is also a pretty significant "luck" component to a good turnaround as well.

The 49ers were 2-5 in 2008 when Nolan was replaced by Singletary. They finished 5-4. Then Singletary went 8-8 with a rookie QB, then he was fired when he went 5-10 in 2010. Now the 9ers fans all love Harbaugh as if he transformed the team himself. I guess they forgot that Alex Smith has been learning this whole time and has some good talent, as does some of those very good young defensive players that were still developing when Singletary was fired.

To summarize my thoughts: I don't think a coaching change will have dramatic impact of the success of the team either for the good or bad. But I also think that Shurmur can be just a good as anyone else we would get, so it may be better than risking a truly bad coach.


I certainly agree that having the talent outweighs what a coaching staff can do. I think it's important to first have an evaluator of talent that can bring the type of players that can win.

You can also say that if a new coach were to come in next year and have success, is it because of the talent that has already been put in place, and is evolving?

I think there are alot of posters on here that believe that it's crazy for some to want to fire this coach and that coach, as well as, find a new QB every year. But when you see the turnaround that takes place each and every year in the NFL, you begin to wonder why we are never a part of that.

This is a win now league. If a coach cannot get it done, get someone else in here that can. Shurmur has not done well. Mccoy did not do well. You can argue that either or both have not gotten a fair shake. Consistency just for the sake of consistency does not make any sense. If things aren't working, then it's time to move forward.
_________________

BIG UPS TO REG....DA MAN
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bruceb


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 7085
Location: Rocky River, OH
PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big poppa pump wrote:
Entropy wrote:
big poppa pump wrote:


I think you can change that to someone who wins. I would like anyone that could come in and get us to be consistent winners.


Of course it would be ideal if simply hiring the right coach instantly turned a team into winners, however that is not a realistic outcome.

The players play the games, not the coaches. And, typically, the players are more successful with more experience playing together.

For the sake of argument, let's say we get a new coach after this year and have success with largely the same players next year. In that event, it will be very likely that media and many fans will spin that outcome into resulting due to "better coaching". However, both history and logic suggests that, while coaching plays an important part in developing players, it is the actual improvement in the performance of the players during games that have the greatest impact on success.

Coaching certainly plays a significant role in providing the environment for improvement of the field, but not the most significant. Coaches can inspire players to play better, but that doesn't mean they will. The players themselves need to have the talent and the drive to improve before coaching could ever affect improvement. And even if coaching does manage to improve a player, there still remains the fact that each player must execute his role within a scheme that involves the proper execution of other players on each given play.

To simplify: to have a successful passing play you must have adequate pass blocking by several players, a QB that makes an adequate read and throw, and then a receiver that makes a catch.

I don't know of any team in football that coaches their players NOT to block, pass, or catch adequately. SO where does the difference come from? In my opinion it comes mostly from talent and experience, neither of which is coachable.

Right now the media is portraying the Colt's success as a tribute to the effect of inspirational coaching. However, let's not overlook the talent and experience they have on the OLine, DLine, and at the skill positions.

Did the Colt's go from 2-14 to now being 6-3 because of the coaching change? Not likely when you consider that they had less talent at QB which created a more limited playbook than even the current rookie has.

They still don't have much of a run game outside of Luck's 5 rushing TDs.

The truth is that when we really examine the turnaround of a bad team to a good team, it is usually due to the team already having talent and simply gaining more experience than it is to a coaching change. Not to say that coaching isn't important, it certainly is, but how important is it (or was it) for Reggie Wayne, Dwight Freeney and the like?

There is also a pretty significant "luck" component to a good turnaround as well.

The 49ers were 2-5 in 2008 when Nolan was replaced by Singletary. They finished 5-4. Then Singletary went 8-8 with a rookie QB, then he was fired when he went 5-10 in 2010. Now the 9ers fans all love Harbaugh as if he transformed the team himself. I guess they forgot that Alex Smith has been learning this whole time and has some good talent, as does some of those very good young defensive players that were still developing when Singletary was fired.

To summarize my thoughts: I don't think a coaching change will have dramatic impact of the success of the team either for the good or bad. But I also think that Shurmur can be just a good as anyone else we would get, so it may be better than risking a truly bad coach.


I certainly agree that having the talent outweighs what a coaching staff can do. I think it's important to first have an evaluator of talent that can bring the type of players that can win.

You can also say that if a new coach were to come in next year and have success, is it because of the talent that has already been put in place, and is evolving?

I think there are alot of posters on here that believe that it's crazy for some to want to fire this coach and that coach, as well as, find a new QB every year. But when you see the turnaround that takes place each and every year in the NFL, you begin to wonder why we are never a part of that.

This is a win now league. If a coach cannot get it done, get someone else in here that can. Shurmur has not done well. Mccoy did not do well. You can argue that either or both have not gotten a fair shake. Consistency just for the sake of consistency does not make any sense. If things aren't working, then it's time to move forward.


Couldn't agree more.
_________________
Everything happens exactly the way it is supposed to happen...otherwise, it would happen some other way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
H2ThaIzzo


Joined: 15 Jan 2009
Posts: 4260
Location: Ohio
PostPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's not just that it's a "win now" league. I think that we are a pretty damn patient fan base. I live in central Ohio, and a radio network did a recent poll, and we outnumber Bengal fans by more than 3/1 as far as viewing games on Sunday goes. It's so much more than not winning. We have no consistency on the field. One game we will score 25 points, but the defense will be terrible and we lose. The very next game the defense will play lights out, but we won't do anything offensively, we will make stupid mistakes, both player and coach, and lose the game. We have had five straight years of losing football. Indy was the worst team in football last year. This year they are 6-3. We spent the 3rd overall pick to get a bruising running back, and when we face downs like 3rd and 1, where we could really use his ability, we take him off the field and throw a deep ball. Shurmur is supposed to be an offensive coach, guru, QB guy, whatever it may be. We have only scored 20+ points in 5 of his 25 games as head coach. If we were losing 35-31, I doubt we would see the backlash that many of us have. We don't get that performance though. And he certainly doesn't come out and place any blame onto himself in the media.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cleveland Browns All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 12 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group