Some thoughts on Mangini

I was genuinely shocked when the Browns announced that Eric Mangini and his entire coaching staff (minus the receivers coach, who left for a college job) will be retained for the 2010 season. This is the first time I can remember that a big-name personality, in the likes of a Mike Holmgren or a Bill Parcells, took over a franchise and didn't bring in his own people. It always happens, its the nature of the business. Holmgren is bringing in his own people in the front office, as ESPN.com's Adam Schefter is reporting that current Eagles general manager Tom Heckert is expected to be named the Browns GM this weekend. I previously wrote on Heckert last week, and I am fully behind this, as he comes from one of the top and most respected organizations in the NFL. The Browns may also bring in another Holmgren guy, Will Lewis, who is currently the director of Pro Personnel with the Seahawks. He has a history with Holmgren and could serve in the same position with the Browns. So the building blocks for a strong front office are in place, which is good.
Now, back to the coaches. With all of this being said, wouldn't it make sense for this new front office to bring in their own coaches, to be an extension of themselves on the field? I thought so. Holmgren has had three separate sitdowns with Mangini, and something must have sparked between the two to make Holmgren think keeping Mangini would be a good idea. Terry Pluto, columnist from The Plain Dealer, wrote on the subject earlier this week (link below)
http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/blog/index.ssf/2010/01/holmgren_did_the_right_thing_i.html
Pluto takes the position that Holmgren looked at the Browns' four-game winning streak to end the season, and the fact that they "played hard" for the entire season, as well as Mangini's willingness to seek guidance in drafting players and picking a quarterback, and decided that keeping Mangini in place would provide some continuity and stability to the organization. I am all for continuity and stability. But to me, keeping a coach around after a very rocky season because his players "play hard" is not acceptable. I'm not saying that's the only reason for Holmgren's decision, I am just debating the validity of one of the things Pluto brought up in his column. Something Pluto touches on at the end of his piece is very interesting: the fact that Holmgren is keeping Mangini around for one season to "keep his seat warm" in order for Holmgren to return to the sidelines in 2011. Or even bringing in a Jon Gruden in 2011. Holmgren coaching the team himself in 2011 seems likely to me. He has hinted in press conferences that he sees himself coaching again before he retires. And if the Browns finish 5-11, or worse, next season, he has an easy excuse to can Mangini and his staff. So this might all be posturing for 2011. Or it may not, he may really want to give Mangini a chance to succeed, as Pluto also suggests. Holmgren may have also been swayed by the players, who reportedly campaigned for Mangini and his staff to be brought back.
Last year, I was for the Browns hiring Mangini, I thought he may have gotten a raw deal in New York and was put into a weird situation with Brett Favre. But as last season progressed, I could never shake the feeling that Mangini was in over his head. The many PR disasters (the bottled water fine, the James Davis injury, the George Kokinis mess), the bad, bad losses and his comments after games all added up and to me, equaled that he he not fit to be a head coach of a team AND pick the players and basically manage the front office. I consider the 5-11 season a complete failure. The bad moments far outnumbered the good. However, I am willing to admit that if Mangini is responsible for coaching the team, and nothing else, the results may be better. History gives us many examples of this (which I will write on in future blog posts), in terms of coaches who also ran the front office, had no success, went back to just coaching, and had success return to them.
Bottom line: I am not the biggest Mangini supporter out there, but I realize the benefits in keeping him around, even if it just for one year. The Browns are still paying Romeo Crennel, Phil Savage, George Kokinis and now Mike Holmgren and Mangini. Maybe Randy Lerner doesn't want to pay people to NOT work for him anymore, which is a good decision financially. It will be interesting to see how the season unfolds, particularly if the losses start to mount and Holmgen and Mangini want to play different players, play different schemes, etc...These are two massive egos here. As far as Browns fans go, let's hope there is enough room for both egos to coexist, in a successful manner.