CLEVELAND — Don’t stop me if you’ve heard this before…
- One of Jimmy Haslam’s biggest faults is that he listens to too many people.
It’s actually a point of pride for him, part of his management style, so it’s not likely to change.
That’s been the case since he bought the team and heard the warnings about the NFL being a tough study for an outsider.
Remember the ESPN.com story in which a former high-level member of Browns management talked about Haslam’s management style.
“You think you’re the one he trusts,” he told author Seth Wickersham. "By the time you realize that he confides in everyone, it’s too late. You’re gone.”
That hasn’t changed.
If you see Freddie Kitchens or John Dorsey having a beer, just ask them.
And get them to buy. They can afford it.
- If you didn’t already understand Haslam’s thirst for any and all feedback before Thursday, you only had to hear him say ownership spoke with “25 to 30” players about what they want in a head coach.
Hopefully, he’s exaggerating that number because, well, that’s ridiculous.
Who does that?
Why?
- If there are 25 to 30 “core” players here worth hearing from, I was watching the wrong 6-10 team.
- The first thing the new coach should do is stop empowering players.
- NFL teams have always had leadership councils made up of a small group of invested players.
It’s always good when those players don’t think the team is about them.
Let’s go with Nick Chubb, J.C. Tretter and Joel Bitonio. And keep it small.
- “I actually think we have a solid football organization in place,’’ Jimmy Haslam said at one point Thursday.
So solid the last head coach and GM are gone.
If you haven’t seen the movie “Gaslight” here’s the plot.
- The “solid football organization” line is reminiscent of Haslam meeting with Joe Banner and praising him for building a strong organization, according to the ESPN.com story.
Right before telling him he was being let go.
- A year ago October, Haslam gathered his employees to tell them Hue Jackson was fired and reiterated how he was determined to get the right coach in place.
He must know it doesn’t spark much confidence for people to hear him using almost the same exact words he used to explain previous detonations.
Check this out:
- Haslam said there “is no guarantee” the Browns will get it right this time.
That much we already knew.
- So the Browns are going with a structure where the head coach will have input in the hiring of a GM (but not final say). The GM will then have control of the 53-man roster while the coach controls the game-day roster.
The GM will report directly to the owner.
The coach will report to the owner.
Paul DePodesta will report to the owner.
Sounds foolproof.
- There’s no guarantee changing the owner would make a difference but it’s the only common denominator.
- Head coaches getting hired first can work.
It didn’t with Eric Mangini and George Kokinis but that had more to do with Kokinis thinking he’d be on equal footing as I remember it.
But it worked in Kansas City when Andy Reid was hired, then John Dorsey joined up shortly after.
What is required in this scenario is an owner trusting one of those opinions more than anyone else’s.
An owner with instincts, or at least one who knows whether football acumen should be the driving organizational force.
Please tell me what Haslam believes? And for how long he is likely to believe it.
- Haslam talked about how the great fans of Cleveland make this an attractive job. OK. Only to an extent.
The great fans of Cleveland were in place when Mike Pettine came in as a third or fourth choice.
And when the last search was whittled to Kitchens, a career position coach, and Minnesota offensive coordinator Kevin Stefanski.
It’s primarily about the organization for top candidates. Do they trust the people running it?
(I realize this doesn’t explain why Ron Rivera jumped into Dan Snyder’s lap. I’m at a loss on that one.)
- “We have really good candidates, and hopefully, we’ll pick the right individual,” Haslam said. “But for me to say I’m over confident wouldn’t be the appropriate thing to say.’’
Again, nobody thought it was appropriate.
- When Haslam talked Thursday of looking for a head coach who is a “continuous learner” and who is “trying to get better all the time,” he in part means someone open to analytics.
The football side of the building under Dorsey and Kitchens had disdain for the analytics side.
I heard Dorsey bristled last year when Stefanski was presented as a finalist. He couldn’t believe Haslam, having professed his commitment to having a “football man” at the top of the organization, was still so swayed by Paul DePodesta’s “process” and evaluation.
Dorsey got his way but — like everything else in Berea — not for long.
- Kitchens was a big miss. No argument there.
So then, Haslam was done with trusting “football” as the overarching influence.
- I recommend re-reading the ESPN.com story from last January. It has good information and a memorable line from the author based on his interviews with former Browns executives, coaches and others around the league:
“Haslam is dazzled by the promise of new ideas.”
Everything in Berea is subject to change.
Except, apparently, that.