#CheddarBay Homestretch edition.

Army Navy Football.JPEG-04562

Nick, JDoep, and Pate*** are riding Navy down the homestretch.

Wanted to post a quick update on where the playoff contender stand and what games matter.

Following are the players still at work for a spot and their score and their remaining picks.




Max/ Plays

7 OXR 75.5 76.5/ Stanford
8 Nick 75.0 78/ Navy, AP, ?
8 FHCF 75.0 78/ Stan, GT, SCAR
10 Acto 74.0 75/ Stanford
10 USFCollin 74.0 78/ 3x? TAMU
10 GRR 74.0 76/ Stan, UCLA
13 Art Vandelay 73.0 75/ Stan, UCLA
14 ChuckyC 72.0 75/ MSU, LSU, Baylor
17 Pate 71.0 76/ UCLA, Stan, Navy***
20 JDoep 70.0 76/Navy, ASU, Duke, Stan***
22 Clay 69.0 76/ 4x? (includes ***) VT


About Joe Banner sacking Chud (apparently because he wouldn’t cut Weeden or Little)…


Young Joe Banner.

I’ll be back with something on the lunacy of the Browns’ angry troll today or tomorrow or the next day depending on the progress I make photoshopping a bicorn hat onto him.

Because, w.r.t. Banner:  Napoleon Complex much?

Remember how when the rumors started yesterday the reaction (after initial shock that even Joe Banner couldn’t be such a douche) was:  “Geez they must be announcing Bill Cowher or Jon Gruden tomorrow.  Maybe they’ve got an inside track on Bill O’Brien and I guess they think he’s that good.”  Hell, I was willing to blame Haslam because the whole smacks of a petulant trust-fund billionaire who thinks he’s a hard-nosed businessman demanding accountability.


No.  Turns out Chud stuck up for his players.  A fire-able offense?  And you do not have an A-list head coach to announce today??

Anyways good luck in free agency (both coaching and player free agency), Joe B.  Good thing we’ve hoard cap space so they we can overpay players whose sole mission is to grab the last dollar.  Because that’s the only player he’ll be able to sign.


If you’re interested in my take on Banner it hasn’t changed much.  I am happy to claim decent early discernment on what he’s about.

But it’s just plain ol’ funny when Joe Banner has Brady-Quinn-trader-upper-to-draft-in-first-rounder Phil Savage cracking wise on him:


And then there’s the Scott Fujita take.

I can’t stop.  Fujita’s stuff is gold.  Here’s highlights of his timeline last night.  (The Silver and King tweets were retweeted by Fujita.)  Enjoy.


  • bupalos

    >>>No. Turns out Chud stuck up for his players.>>>

    Right. Stuck up for Brandon Weeden. And Greg Little. And by “stuck up for,” we mean “insisted must have a job on the Cleveland Browns.” Do you seriously want to make the argument that it’s a “joke” to fire the guy that won’t fire Brandon Weeden?

    Personally, I hope that’s not all there is to this. I sincerely hope they at least noticed and figured in Chud’s objective underperformance and inattention to detail on gameday, an inattention to coaching detail that I think you could see filter into all areas of the team. I hope they noticed that the guy relentlessly fires off his timeouts because he kind of feels like the game is getting kinda lateish, or notice he left 15 points on the field early in games because he wanted to make “statements” that felt like they had more to do with marketing than football. Or that his special teams were profoundly ill prepared and arguably cost 2 huge games. Or that any time a play turned out in any way surprising the team could not get lined up in time for the next one.

    I’m am worried that it is only about the personnel stuff, and they’ll go get another inverted-Jim-Harbaugh type that still fixates on the one scenario his gut says is most likely. Another guy that fails to dot the i’s and cross the t’s that make the difference between winning and losing NFL football.

    And in the interest of sharpening whatever your eventual take here is, you might want to drop Phil Savage as any kind of character witness for the prosecution as to what or who constitutes a joke.

    • Welp, if you’re a coach who’s being evaluated on ‘your record’ would you rather have a 1st round pick who knows your offense and has been with the team since training camp on the team or a youtube monmouth guy?

      If you’re coach and you have to cut a WR perhaps you’d like to cut the possession receiver leading the league in drops. Not drops per target; total drops.

      As for as attention to detail, perhaps the better move for a head coach is to keep his players engaged any playing hard -WHICH HE DID- in spite of the deliberate roster non-building for the 2013.

      Do you seriously want to back the Haslam/Banner horse in this? I think you’re .. I can’t even fathom thinking well of Banner/Haslam as either football men, or managers of people, or humans-capable-of-empathy. The view from here is a true short-man-syndrome and a guy born on third who thinks he hit a triple.

      The benign reading on all this is that Banner is taking arrows for impulsive Haslam decisions. But there’s no good here.

      • bupalos

        Little over Bess I can just see. At least he tries, and at least he blocks.

        Weeden. No. Weeden is for my money as bad as you can do. I think he’s poison in almost every way, especially including being clearly lazy and disinterested and self-centered. Taney or whatever hardworking overachiever is not only probably technically better, but a much better statement. But some of that can be preference. The point is not only being wrong, but being willing to go to war over that, while not being able to field a team that pays attention and is on point.

        I’m not here to cheer for Banardi. I have little opinion on them overall, though I admit liking this “we’re not steering by what people are going to say” strain that shows up very strongly in this and in the TR deal. But I’m mostly just reacting to the moves themselves. I think Chud is a bad coach. He’s got superstar coordinators and still can’t manage a game or get the team on point or even close to it. There are drawbacks to firing him, and he’s clearly personally likable, but in the end, I can’t help but support firing a bad coach.

    • NeedsFoodBadly

      If you’re blaming Chud for Weeden, you have to blame the front office for that too.

      • bupalos

        I’m filling in some blanks, but it starts to sound like maybe they wanted a real competition at QB going in and feel like Chud didn’t really give it to them but annointed Weeden unjustly. And then he went back to the Weedy One after the injury to boot. Hard to know how much back and forth and disagreement there may have been there, but one thing that is clear is that Chud valued Weeden more than Banardi did.

        I can totally see Lombardi feeling like his polymath genius ability was vindicated with Hoyer’s 2 o.k-ish games (that maybe they had to force on Chud??), and then stewing the whole rest of the year and skulking around pulling Iago-type schemes in the background to vent spleen on Chud. I specifically remember a camera shot of Lombardi in the Buff game after the Hoyer knee and thinking, man, it looks like his dog just saved a schoolkid, and then someone shot it.

  • HitTheHorns

    I totally get why move is being mocked and ridiculed. And I don’t disagree with any of it. But can we just remember that this coach allowed Brandon Weeden to start the season, then brought him back after Hoyer was hurt? Then started him on the road in Green Bay (week 7) after he threw the worst INT in NFL history against Detroit? Also the same coach that gave Willis McGahee starter’s carries during meaningful games in October and November, and watches a backup go to Tampa and immediately become a legit NFL starting running back.

    If the point all along is that the front office would use this year to evaluate players drafted under a previous regime, then that mission was accomplished. Nobody should be surprised at this move. Haslem spoke of stability, but all of their actions (Trading Richardson, not extending Ward or Mack) said this was something we should have seen coming.

  • zarathustra

    Your central premise all along has been that the front office wanted to lose on purpose this year–tank, punt the season. By firing the coach after a 4-12 season the front office seems to be saying that they expected more, that there intention was actually not to lose games.
    And you see this as validating your point????

    • It validates the premise that Banner/Haslam are ass-covering connivers more interested in continually resetting the ‘reboot clock’ so that they do not have to be held accountable thus revealing said pronouncements to the lip-service that I called it out as.

      • bupalos

        How does it possibly “cover their asses” when they cop to having made a hiring blunder in their first big move? You really think anyone on the planet now gives them more time to get it right because they got it wrong once? Come on. This is absolutely turned on its head.

        The mass hysterical reaction to this firing is all the evidence you need to see that this is in no way about ass covering. It’s genuine disagreement, almost pathologically devoid of marketing. It shares a hell of a lot more DNA with the TR deal than Holmgren’s belated Mangini dumping.

        Personally, I’d like to see someone explain in what ways Chud showed himself to be a good coach. The only way this is a “joke” is if there is more virtue than vice there.

        • You kidding? They didn’t cop to anything. They scapegoated a coach after clearly signaling rebuild year.

          That’s not accountability. It’s douche-baggery.

          But I’m just going by the player reports coming from Fujita. Maybe you know better than me how this all flies in the locker room.

          • bupalos

            I’m pretty sure how it flies in the locker room is complicated, and that Fujita is a guy with a record of turning the spout on and off in strange and self-serving ways.

            OBR seems to have decent sources and seems to be reporting from a “two-or-more sides to this” approach that I trust a lot more than re-tweets from Scott Fujita.

          • then you enjoyed the theobr’s leaking of the berea’s not wanting to sign mack because they thought he was too soft? yes i enjoyed those too.

            talk about cherry picking your sources. joe thomas is on record that he’d be shocked and disappointed. is that self-serving?

            where are the guys happy with chud getting canned and why aren’t they speaking out? after all, they’d be backing up their front office.

          • bupalos

            There are clearly FO influences there. I think that makes it somewhat more valuable as a resource in divining the whole situation. I’m reading you think it makes it less valuable.

            Might be a difference between a “find the person that knows the truth and believe them” approach versus a “ferret the truth from the field of competing claims” approach.

          • bupalos

            You can’t scapegoat the guy you hired and talked up just a few months ago. You just can’t. Mangini was scapegoated. Chud was fired. And absent ANY pr benefit to the FO (laughable you are even suggesting this given the universal and completely predictable reaction) or something more, I’m going with “fired for being a bad coach despite the bad PR.” Because independent anything else, he looked like a bad coach to me.

      • zarathustra

        I have certainly been on record supporting this general direction of this front office and do not think this has any impact on their “clock” at all. This move does not reset that clock. If anything it is an indication that they are aware that clock started a year ago and there is a sense of urgency to get on track.

  • NeedsFoodBadly

    I’m mulling these possibilities: the Browns hire sleazeball Josh McDaniels, draft sleazy Johnny Football in the first round, bring in Tim Tebow (not particularly sleazy, just bad at throwing footballs).

    Some combination of these could induce me to take a sabbatical from my Browns fandom. It would be very hard to root for an organization riddled with such sleazy people from top to bottom.

    • bupalos

      I think Bellichick might count as “sleazy” in this kind of accounting too. Specifically why so down on McD and JM?

      • NeedsFoodBadly

        Belichick is definitely a sleazy individual.

        I dislike what McDaniels showed during his tenure as the Broncos HC. Drafting Tim Tebow in the first round isn’t sleazy, but it is stupid. The way he handled Cutler was a bit grotesque, as was the flirtation with Belichickian cheats. He also seems to have been universally loathed in his brief time there, from all I’ve read.

        Manziel seems like a petulant, entitled brat with a McCoy/Tebow vibe – I highly doubt his college success/skills will translate to the pros. The famous rubbing fingers taunt was asinine. He’s also buddies with Drake, so y’know, Drake, and Haslam is reportedly a big fan and I imagine Haslam only likes fellow sleazy people.

        I’m also sick of Lombardi’s creepy “Patriots Way” fetish. It’s weird. And generally Belichick’s castoffs don’t really have a rich history of success.

        • bupalos

          Can’t really fully disagree with much of that. I don’t know enough about McDaniels to say much, but as for Belichick and Manziel, I have problems with aspects of both of them, but I do think both are smart in ways that make them successful at football and I do think Manziel will be very good in the NFL.

  • Dave Kolonich

    You know we’ve hit absolute rock bottom when we turn to Phil Savage and Scott Fujita for clarity.

    And for all those who passionately defended Banner and Lombardi in April, you’re getting exactly what you wanted now. Enjoy it.

    • zarathustra

      I defended the front office in April. I’m not sure how this changes anything. I’m curious as to how you think this does. This was year one for the front office and I believe they acted prudently on several fronts. It was a year to transition to their program and evaluate what they had. In year two I expect more success. By firing Chudidhar apparently they do too.

      • humboldt

        We have hit a point of unprecedented instability and dysfunction as an organization and you do realize you’re defending that, right?

        • zarathustra

          They fired a coach after one season. Hardly unprecedented. This was done a year ago in Jacksonville. It is early but that looks like it was probably the correct move. Before that it was done in Seattle and has been an unequivocal success.

          • humboldt

            I was referring to unprecedented instability for the Browns. Given that we were promised Rooney-like stability a year ago, it’s hard to imagine we could have ended up in a worse place as an organization at the end of this season.

            This is a festering wound that could only be (partially) ameliorated by a major hire this week. I don’t have much confidence that this is in the offing, but what do I know?

      • Dave Kolonich

        The front office hired the coach they just fired. Not sure what’s “prudent” about that action.

        • zarathustra

          Prudent on several fronts does not mean prudent on every front. I have read and enjoyed your work for a long time so am surprised I need to make such a basic distinction for you. Perhaps membership in the all or nothing mob has blinded you to the concept of nuance?

          • Dave Kolonich

            That’s one gigantic “front.” But right, let’s talk about nuance.

    • NeedsFoodBadly

      Dunno, Fujita usually seemed like a pretty intelligent, reasonable guy.

      • Dave Kolonich

        I view him more as one of Holmgren’s band of grifters. Perhaps I need to separate him from that characterization.

        • Fujita was a check-collector to be sure (although his injury in the 2009 Jets game was one of the season changers in that fateful year).

          But he was a team leader and straight talker.

          He earns points with me for recognizing the potential asset LeCharles Bentley can and should be for the Browns.

          • bupalos

            If you followed the backstory on the bountygate thing, it’s hard to call him simply a “straight talker.”

            He’s a somewhat confused and confusing person in his own right, although certainly not a voice I’d discount.

Skip to toolbar