• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The Kevin Stefanski: Two-Time Coach of the Year Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Grade the signing

  • A+ -Awesome Analytics Alignment!

    Votes: 55 30.9%

  • A - Good choice moving forward

    Votes: 53 29.8%

  • B - Better than the other options

    Votes: 20 11.2%

  • C - Could work out I guess

    Votes: 30 16.9%

  • D - Browns done put their foot in it again, but at least he looks good on TV

    Votes: 9 5.1%

  • F - A failure on every level

    Votes: 11 6.2%
  • Total voters
    178
The Human Q-Tip said:
LaCanfora's comment doesn't even make any sense, at least in the truncated form it was posted in that tweet. How does being selected by "the smartest people in the room" set someone up for a "miserable failure"? There's no logical connection between those two thoughts.
Click to expand...
what does that even mean?
 
I'mWithDan said:
Just having had some experience with this.......I think even meetings like this are largely overblown.

I don't have a rosy view of Haslam but I have had enough professional experience with executives / owners to understand how their minds work. Naming names isn't important here.....but there were "good" owners who were doing the above, just not publicly stating it was being done.....and generally speaking, most of us (even here...on this message board), would laugh at the depth of those conversations. I put together a handful of "owner" presentations and it's stuff you'd show your girlfriend or mom, who can't be bothered to understand all the nuances of football but wants to know what is happening.

Honestly, ownership and executives just want to understand baseline strategy and execution. Haslam truly wants to sit in a meeting, hear Stefanski and Co. talk about one or two power point slides and anecdotally be able to lean over to his buddy in the owners box on gameday and say "That TD was perfect. We noticed we weren't throwing enough on second down and put in some packages this week to make it happen". Buddy thinks owner is a God and they all go about their day.

Do some owners go beyond that? I would imagine so.....but if we are just talking about generic owner, wether good or bad, they generally just want to feel involved......and that surface level involvement, more times than not, leads them to stay out of everyone's more important business......because they feel more included / plugged in to what is going on.

I would just try to calm the fears over any of these media type stories mattering. The best organizations start as a wide, vast stream of collaborative efforts and then slowly narrow over time / with success. If Stefanski starts stringing 10 win seasons together, Haslam is gonna stop caring about his Monday morning meeting or even better yet, ask Stefanski if it is helpful. Once success starts to take hold, it stops being about who should be involved and starts being about who shouldn't. The hallmark of success, at least in sports....to me, is getting to that tipping point.......to where it stops being about having success and starts being about how to sustain it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This "weekly meeting" narrative the media is running with is so foolish. If nothing else, it becomes a weekly check-in for communication sake like, you know, how most successful companies try to operate. Essentially holding everyone accountable to at least be on some sort of same page from a week-to-week standpoint, top to bottom, so we don't have anymore tweets about our coach throwing out 70% of what we game planned during the week so he can play NFL Blitz all Sunday long.
 
Kbiz said:
Exactly. This "weekly meeting" narrative the media is running with is so foolish. If nothing else, it becomes a weekly check-in for communication sake like, you know, how most successful companies try to operate. Essentially holding everyone accountable to at least be on some sort of same page from a week-to-week standpoint, top to bottom, so we don't have anymore tweets about our coach throwing out 70% of what we game planned during the week so he can play NFL Blitz all Sunday long.
Click to expand...

It also then drives the Monday conversation.

"You told me on Friday that you wanted to focus on X, Y, and Z during the game. Do you think that happened? If not, why? Did you notice something and change strategy? Did our strategy just simply not work out?"

I don't understand what's so bad about it *unless* Haslam is saying "OK. I think you should do A, B, and C instead going forward. Go do those."
 
Kbiz said:
I can't believe after last year people are in here complaining about incorporating analytics into our game plans.


Incorporating actionable data into ANYTHING is literally the future of almost every industry. Why? Because it produces actual outcomes that you can weigh against one another.

People don't want data. People don't want "football guys". I think people just don't want to be Browns fans.

Get with the time folks.
Click to expand...

What I find funny is people will use stats to prove the HC/OC are calling the wrong plays, use the wrong formation, not using the right personal groupings, not doing play action enough, etc....but are afraid of analytics.

Honestly this is a very analytics board, people here use PFF and other places to get stats to prove their point through analytics. Its crazy how much Depodesto makes for his numbers (seems like my dream job honestly, I am a sports stat geek), but he has proven he is really, really good at providing the stats.
 
I'mWithDan said:
Here is another way to look at this outcome......

Making a mistake is easy. Admitting to making a mistake is hard. Correcting that mistake can be even harder.

The Browns have seemingly done all 3 here. Will they be right? Remains to be seen......but the above at least shows some organizational growth.

Maybe most important of all.......we hired a guy who is so egoless, so humble, that he was able to put that rejection aside (12 months ago) and still want to take this job. That speaks volumes of the type of leader he is and can be IMO. How many other guys, in the maniacal, ego filled profession that is professional coaching, would have just told the Browns to fuck off? My guess is a lot......or they would have merely pursued other opportunities or waited for another. But this guy wants to somehow be here, in all our fucked up glory, because he thinks this roster and power structure can work. Just put all the media bullshit aside and think about that.....it will make you feel a lot better. Stefanski......who probably in another 12 months, could have had just about any job, wants to be here......and he somehow still wants to be here after we hired Freddie Kitchens over him. If that isn't exciting, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

Boy do I hope you're right and I'm just way off... I've been as optimistic about these new coaches/GMs since I joined this site & this whole turnover exercise has sapped any optimism or enthusiasm I have. Shit, I was digging for positives after the Pettine search and had my heels dug deep into the ground that there was no negative to take from that search. Today, I'm just focused on all the points in the process where dissent can grow.
 
Soda said:
I don't like this comparison at all. Paul Brown was the coach and leader of the organization. He should be the guy that is driving the use of that kind of stuff. It should be driven by the man who directs the ongoings of the football field, not by the part time strategy guy in San Diego. If analytics are going to be used, they should be used at the behest of the coach.
Click to expand...

I think that's a distinction without a difference in the context of choosing your new coach. You deliberately make "willingness to make significant use of analytics" one of the criteria for selection of a new head coach. So yes, it's technically up to him...but you only hire the guy if you know he's going to use it.

The point about Paul Brown was addressing the larger question of those guys who mock the use of analytics period.
 
Last edited:
Haslam and his ole lady just can't leave things alone, meddling in areas they know nothing about. Just write the checks and STFU. Sadly their plan is doomed for failure
 
The Human Q-Tip said:
LaCanfora's comment doesn't even make any sense, at least in the truncated form it was posted in that tweet. How does being selected by "the smartest people in the room" set someone up for a "miserable failure"? There's no logical connection between those two thoughts.
Click to expand...
I listened to the entire interview and he offered no substance, whatsoever, to support his opinion (I want to emphasize that word) that it could be a miserable failure. His subsequent rationale was:
  • "Look, maybe it could work - who knows."
  • There's been a history of infighting in Cleveland so... he will have to deal with that.
  • "Expectations are now higher than last year..." Spoiler: they're not.
Shame on local media for taking the low hanging fruit by giving these guys a platform. LaCanfora has an axe to grind and only serves to further their flimsy, opinion-based narratives.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top