Showing posts with label Mary Kay Cabot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mary Kay Cabot. Show all posts

Friday, January 21, 2011

The Hiring Process


As the Cleveland Browns go about the real work of putting together a football team, the hand wringing already has begun. Some fans and some in the local media are getting breathless with worry over the coordinators the Browns haven’t been able to hire.

In Thursday’s Plain Dealer for example Mary Kay Cabot implied that the Browns already are working on what amounts to their third choice as the offensive coordinator after Mike McCoy opted to stay with Denver and Bill Musgrave opted to take a job with the Minnesota Vikings. In that way Cabot already sets up new head coach Pat Shurmur and club president Mike Holmgren for failure because, after all, how good can anyone’s third choice for an open position really be?

Well, to answer that question is to buy into a premise based on anecdotal evidence disguised as fact.

Three weeks ago neither Cabot nor fans who are kvetching could pick McCoy or Musgrave out of a lineup. They wouldn’t have been able to hazard a guess about their offensive philosophies, their coaching histories (without consulting Wikipedia) or whether or not they are even good coaches. That either or both would be considered superior choices to anyone else would have been unfathomable. So it seems rather meaningless to bracket the discussion in the context that these two were somehow among the top coordinators in the league and the Browns have missed out and will suffer for it.

Next, there is absolutely no evidence that either McCoy or Musgrave were their number one and two choices or that, indeed, either one actually turned down the Browns. McCoy was under contract with Denver already and the new head coach, John Fox, opted to keep McCoy mainly because of his long association with him from his days in Carolina. There is a devil you know factor at work for anyone contemplating a job change.

As for Musgrave, we know he was interviewed but we don’t know whether or not he was ever offered the job. If anything there is more reason to believe that he wasn’t offered the job than there is that he was and that he spurned the Browns for the Vikings.

When hiring for this type of job there is a built in assumption that the person being interviewed already is qualified. Professional sports teams, like virtually any other employer, doesn’t waste time conducting fishing expeditions for high level hires. These aren’t mail order hires. Instead, the focus of these interviews is culture. What the interviewer is trying to discern is how well he and the prospect can work together. In this case do they share a similar vision on offensive approach? Do they have similar views on how various situations are handled?

It could very well be that in the course of their interviews it became clear to Shurmur and/or Musgrave that they were on different pages. That doesn’t mean one is right and one is wrong. It just means that the fit didn’t seem right to one or both of them. Far better to realize that now than 14 games into next season.

Another element in the search in this case is the simple fact that Shurmur was hired because of his own offensive expertise and thus what he might be requiring of an offensive coordinator is likely to be much different than what a more defensive minded head coach, like Leslie Frazier in Minnesota, might want. Shurmur isn’t trying to find someone to flesh out a vague sense of how he feels an offense should work. Shurmur’s trying to find a coordinator who can bring some additional value to the approach he’s already adopted.

Shurmur already has said that he intends to call the offensive plays. That right there is a limiting factor to many prospective coordinator candidates and likely was to someone like Musgrave and maybe even McCoy. Calling the plays is considered the glamour part of the coordinator job and to know going in that you won’t be in charge of that would certainly be seen as a negative by many candidates.

Again, that doesn’t mean either Shurmur or Musgrave is wrong. It’s just that they are going in different directions.

Let’s also throw out the notion that underlying the intense focus at the moment on the hiring of offensive and defensive coordinators is the overemphasis by the fans on these coaches’ roles. Brian Daboll, the Browns’ former offensive coordinator, was hired for that same role in Miami. That had to qualify as a mini-shock to most Browns’ fans but it actually just illustrates the point that the role of the coordinator is often misunderstood.

What Browns fans won’t know until they watch Daboll work in Miami is how hamstrung Daboll might have been in Cleveland by the views of his boss, Eric Mangini, and the limited talent the Browns had at the skill positions. I don’t know that Lindy Infante could have done any better given the tools that Daboll had to work with or the approach that Mangini espoused.

The other thing about the Daboll/Mangini dynamic was the overriding sense you got each week that the two were never really on the same page. It wasn’t any one thing that either of them said but more a collection of statements and gestures over time. One of the abiding mysteries of this last season was why, after all the preseason talk, you rarely saw Seneca Wallace and Josh Cribbs on the field at the same time.

It’s pretty likely that Daboll was fostering that kind of talk. Frankly, that’s the kind of thing any offensive coordinator dreams of, the next great innovation. It’s also pretty likely that it was Mangini that ultimately shut it down. Mangini may like the occasional gimmick, but he’s vanilla in his overall approach which is why the Browns’ offense ended up being vanilla in its approach. Hold on to the ball as long as possible and get whatever points might be there. Take as few chances as possible and take the points. Always take the points.

In a different setting Daboll may very well thrive. If he’s more attuned to his head coach and has the talent to execute his schemes he’ll justify the confidence the Dolphins have in him. That won’t make the case that the Browns should have kept him but it will make the case that the best coordinator for any team is one who works well with the head coach.

Thus all we really know is that whoever is hired as offensive coordinator won’t necessarily have been Shurmur’s third or fourth choice but the person who engendered the best vibe for the rookie head coach.

The far more interesting hire for Shurmur will be on the defensive side of the ball. Other than a general notion that he prefers the 4-3 defense, Shurmur is mostly putting the fate of the defense in the hands of his coordinator. That’s why it’s not surprise that he’s looking for deep experience on that side of the ball, far more than he’s looking for in an offensive coordinator.

There’s no question that the assistants Shurmur hires will have a significant impact on the success or failure of this team. But that success or failure won’t be the result of Shurmur having hired a suddenly “hot” assistant. The real trick and the real measure of whether Shurmur will be successful will come if he hires assistants that share his vision. It seems like such a simple task but so much of the Browns’ failures for so long as been the abject inability to execute on just this task.

Saturday, January 05, 2008

Negotiation 101

The first step in getting someone to buy what you’re selling is to blur the distinction between their wants and their needs. The principle applies whether you’re selling cars or toothpaste. Or football coaches.

Sports agent Joe Linta, who just a few years ago was peddling stocks and bonds for Prudential Securities, is now peddling football players and coaches to NFL executives. On that score, he’s like a thousand others. But in this case, he also represents Browns head coach Romeo Crennel, who still has two years left on the last contract he signed. Linta has spent the last few days trying to convince Browns general manager Phil Savage that the Browns shouldn’t just want Crennel under contract for an additional three years, they really need it.

According to a story that made the rounds in the Plain Dealer on Friday, the Browns and Linta supposedly were in on-going talks on an extension for Crennel. Linta told Mary Kay Cabot “the talks were very positive. I really believe [Browns owner] Randy Lerner will want to make Romeo the face of the franchise for the next five years. Hopefully we can work toward that end.”

But in a story on Saturday by Marla Ridenour in the Akron Beacon Journal, Linta denied such talks are on-going. According to Linta this time, he did call the Browns, but not to discuss an extension. Instead, the call, he said :…would be akin to an end-of-the-year evaluation meeting, not necessarily talking about football. '”Nobody said anything about a three-year deal. It was an inquiry from me to see where we stand, 'Let's evaluate this three years into it.’”

Given that Cabot’s story appeared before Ridenour’s the most plausible explanation is that Linta used Cabot as a pawn in his efforts to manufacture sudden interest in his client. It wouldn’t be the first time that an agent used a pliable and gullible member of the media to further the interests of his client.

If you parse Linta’s quote to Cabot closely, which neither Cabot nor her editors apparently did, Linta doesn’t actually claim that he and the Browns were engaged in contract extension talks, though he implies it mightily. What he does is say specifically is that he spoke with the Browns, though about what he carefully didn’t say, probably because he wasn’t asked. Then he says he believes Lerner will want to make Crennel the face of the franchise and concludes with a hope that the two sides can work toward that end. You can see the “if dog, rabbit” logic Cabot used when writing her story, but again Linta doesn’t actually claim there were any talks of a contract extension. He just let Cabot conclude as much and run with it, which she did.

And for a day, Cabot’s story had legs, was all over the internet, and made its way eventually to talk radio on Friday night, where Mark “Munch” Bishop and his guest, former Browns offensive lineman Jim Pyne, implored Savage to indeed make Crennel the face of the franchise because of the positive message it would send to potential free agents about the stability in Cleveland. Bishop then told touching stories of the many unnamed Browns players he spoke to who simply well up when they speak of their love for Crennel and what a swell coach he’s been. Why Bishop wouldn’t name the players involved is a different issue for another day. But Bishop’s testimonial was then followed by the carefully screened callers who, too, talked about the great job that Crennel has done with the team.

At this point it would seem that Linta had done his job well. Now all that was left was for Savage to take the bait and get a deal done with Crennel right now.

Ridenour wasn’t so easily fooled. She contacted Linta (side note: agents are never hard to find when they are trying to make money) and must have asked him directly whether he and the Browns actually had a specific conversation about extending Crennel’s contract. To that, Linta had to admit that no, he and the Browns hadn’t had such talks but he sure as heck thinks they should because that would make the Browns look “rock solid” to potential free agents. Oops.

Ridenour then apparently asked Linta if he was the source of the Crennel-to-Miami rumors that just happened to precede the Crennel contract extension story. He told Ridenour “it would have been a great rumor for me to plant. I wish I could take credit for it.” Not exactly a denial, particularly considering how Linta likes to insinuate one thing when the truth is something else. In other words, it’s probably safe to assume that Linta either directly or through someone in his fledging JL Sports agency is indeed the source of that rumor which, just coincidentally, was first reported by another member of the Cleveland media, Tony Rizzo.

Putting this all together, it seems like Negotiation for Dummies by a ham-handed practioner, and it still worked, at least somewhat. The Browns finish 10-6 but missed the playoffs. Fans are strangely thrilled with another season watching others play for the Super Bowl. Rizzo gets a “hot tip” from an unnamed source that new Miami Dolphins president Bill Parcells is interested in Crennel (if only that were true!). That rumor is picked up by ProFootballTalk.com, a gossipy web site that allegedly is read by NFL executives but is surely read by others in the media. Suddenly, it’s a national story, big surprise. Next, Crennel’s agent surfaces to imply that the Browns and Crennel are talking extension, the not so subtle further implication being that Savage is so concerned about Parcells stealing his coach that he needs to get a deal done now. The local media gets into a further feeding frenzy and the next thing you know there is such a groundswell of support for Crennel that it would seem foolish for Savage not to extend Crennel’s contract.

Too bad that Ridenour had to come along and throw cold water on this all. To that point this whole thing was following pretty much the story line from the brilliant little movie, “For Your Consideration” in which a technician on a movie set tells an actress that he heard from his girlfriend who supposedly saw a story on the internet that someone who had visited the movie set saw the actress’s performance and it was “Oscar worthy.” The press agent for the film latches on to the story tells another and another and suddenly there is Oscar buzz in Hollywood among the media about the movie itself and each and every actor in it. It builds to the point where there is talk that the movie itself, which was retooled in response to the Oscar buzz, would get a Best Picture nod. In the end, there was nothing much to any of it, the film is ignored and so too was the actress.

In the end, there really isn’t much to this Crennel extension story, either. It’s all pretty petty stuff really but it is nonetheless fascinating to see the inertia that can be created through a little media manipulation by an agent whose only real concern is to make money for his client and for himself. Blaming Linta for acting like an agent would be like blaming a snake for slithering. That doesn’t excuse the local media for its part in facilitating what is essentially a non-story, Ridenour excepted, nor should it obscure the bottom line reality in all of it: an extension of Crennel’s contract at this point is premature at best.

Just because Linta claims Crennel would be a lame duck with only two years on his contract doesn’t make it so. Crennel with one year left on his contract wouldn’t make him a lame duck, either. All it really means is that the team is taking a wait-and-see approach, which seems about the right thing to do with a coach who is averaging less than seven wins a season in his three years in charge. Besides, if contract length meant anything, Brian Billick would still be the head coach in Baltimore. Last season he was rewarded with a four-year extension and was fired this year after going 5-11.

The other thing to keep in mind is that professional football players really do understand that they are in a business and not just a sport. Coaches getting hired and fired is all just part of the job. Nobody likes the uncertainty that instability at the top creates, but when it comes to professional ball players with relatively short careers, money is far more important. Put it this way, for every free agent who claims he signed with a team because the head coach is supposedly firmly established, there is an equal and opposite number who signs with a franchise that just fired its head coach because it represents a new start and new direction. In other words, it’s about the money.

Linta has a vested interest in extolling Crennel’s virtues and hiding his flaws. But if it was prudent for Savage not to fire Crennel after last season’s 4-12 debacle, it’s just as prudent for Savage not to get overly jazzed about this year’s 10-6 season either. Somewhere between these two seemingly opposite results is an underlying truth about Crennel’s abilities as a head coach. If Randy Lerner is really as smart as Linta claims, then letting the truth about Crennel be revealed over its more natural course is what actually serves the Browns interests far more than getting caught up in the manufactured hype of an agent. It also is likely to save Lerner a pile of money.