SITE NEWS: We are moving all of our site and company news into a single blog for Sports-Reference.com. We'll tag all PFR content, so you can quickly and easily find the content you want.
Also, our existing PFR blog rss feed will be redirected to the new site's feed.
Pro-Football-Reference.com » Sports Reference
For more from Chase and Jason, check out their work at Football Perspective and The Big Lead.
ShareThisRomeo Crennel
To say that I don't follow the Browns closely would be an understatement. But I do have a good friend who is a Browns' fan and he assures me that, despite the 10-22 record, he and his colleagues are not displeased with the work Romeo Crennel has done and is doing. This squares with the feeling I get from the national media.
It seems to me that all coaches (except Art Shell) get one free year to be as bad as they want with no consequence. But most coaches start to feel the heat if they don't at least show some improvement in their second year.
Take a look at this. It's all coaches who debuted in 1990 or later and won 12/32 or fewer of their games in their first two seasons:
Coach Debut First 2 Since
=================================================
Norv Turner 1994 9-23-0 49- 59- 1
Dick Jauron 1999 11-21-0 32- 37- 0
Vince Tobin 1996 11-21-0 17- 22- 0
Joe Bugel 1990 9-23-0 15- 33- 0
David Shula 1992 8-24-0 11- 28- 0
Dave McGinnis 2000 13-28-0 4- 12- 0
Gregg Williams 2001 11-21-0 6- 10- 0
Dave Campo 2000 10-22-0 5- 11- 0
Mike Riley 1999 9-23-0 5- 11- 0
Steve Spurrier 2002 12-20-0 0- 0- 0
Dick LeBeau 2000 12-33-0 0- 0- 0
Dick McPherson 1991 8-24-0 0- 0- 0
Chris Palmer 1999 5-27-0 0- 0- 0
Marty Mornhinweg 2001 5-27-0 0- 0- 0
Mike Nolan 2005 11-21-0 0- 0- 0
Romeo Crennel 2005 10-22-0 0- 0- 0
Crennel's fate is not pre-determined, of course, but it's pretty grim when your best historical comps are Dick Jauron and Norv Turner.
But wait. I was cheating. If you take it back just one more year, you get one of my favorite coaches of all time:
Coach Debut First 2 Since
=================================================
Jimmy Johnson 1989 8-24-0 72- 40- 0
Johnson's first two years, though, were much different from Crennel's. Johnson gutted the team and suffered through a 1-15 rookie campaign, but he improved to 7-9 in his second year. And Johnson is the only coach who debuted in the 80s and might make the list look more promising for Crennel.
But look at this list of guys who debuted in the 70s, started off horribly, and went on to have very successful careers:
Coach Debut First 2 Since
=================================================
Marv Levy 1978 11-21-0 132- 91- 0
Dick Vermeil 1976 9-19-0 111- 90- 0
Bill Walsh 1979 8-24-0 84- 35- 1
And if you go back further than that, you get Tom Landry (4-20-2 in his first two years) and Chuck Noll (6-22).
This post isn't about Romeo Crennel anymore. I'm not sure what it's about. But here's what we've learned.
- Exactly one coach in the last 25ish years has suffered through a Crennel-like first two years and then gone on to have a successful coaching career.
- Back in the 70s and before, several coaches did it.
Why the change? The main possibilities are:
1. There hasn't been a change. The data is just a little bit flukish. Supporters of this explanation could cite, among other things, the fact that Bill Belichick barely missed the cutoff for inclusion, winning 13 of his first 32 games. Also, of course, the careers of the coaches debuting in the 90s have yet to be completed. That list might look a lot different 20 years from now.
2. Coaches are on a shorter leash now. If his coaching career began in today's NFL, Tom Landry probably would not have ever had the chance to become Tom Landry. Under this theory, it's likely that Dave McGinnis, Mike Riley, Chris Palmer, or someone of that ilk is a Hall of Fame coach who will never get the chance to show it.
For your enjoyment, here are all coaches debuting since 1950 who won 12/32 or fewer of their games during their first two years:
Coach Debut First 2 Since
=================================================
Tom Landry 1960 9-28-3 241-134- 3
Chuck Noll 1969 12-30-0 181-118- 1
Marv Levy 1978 11-21-0 132- 91- 0
Weeb Ewbank 1954 8-15-1 122-114- 6
Dick Vermeil 1976 9-19-0 111- 90- 0
Bill Walsh 1979 8-24-0 84- 35- 1
Jimmy Johnson 1989 8-24-0 72- 40- 0
Norm VanBrocklin 1961 5-22-1 61- 78- 6
Joe Kuharich 1952 7-17-0 51- 64- 3
Norv Turner 1994 9-23-0 49- 59- 1
Bart Starr 1975 9-19-0 43- 57- 3
John McKay 1976 2-26-0 42- 62- 1
Dick Jauron 1999 11-21-0 32- 37- 0
Ray Perkins 1979 10-22-0 32- 53- 0
Jim Hanifan 1980 12-20-0 27- 33- 1
Walt Michaels 1977 11-19-0 28- 28- 1
Dan Henning 1983 11-21-0 27- 52- 1
Jack Patera 1976 7-21-0 28- 38- 0
Marion Campbell 1974 11-30-0 23- 50- 1
Pop Ivy 1958 15-31-2 17- 11- 0
Vince Tobin 1996 11-21-0 17- 22- 0
Jack Christiansen 1963 13-25-1 13- 13- 2
Joe Bugel 1990 9-23-0 15- 33- 0
Gene Stallings 1986 11-19-1 12- 15- 0
Bill McPeak 1961 6-19-3 15- 27- 0
Harland Svare 1962 10-21-3 11- 27- 2
Jim Dooley 1968 20-36-0 0- 0- 0
David Shula 1992 8-24-0 11- 28- 0
Darryl Rogers 1985 12-20-0 6- 20- 0
Bill Austin 1966 11-28-3 6- 8- 0
Dave McGinnis 2000 13-28-0 4- 12- 0
Gregg Williams 2001 11-21-0 6- 10- 0
Dave Campo 2000 10-22-0 5- 11- 0
Gene Ronzani 1950 6-18-0 8- 13- 1
Mike Riley 1999 9-23-0 5- 11- 0
Steve Spurrier 2002 12-20-0 0- 0- 0
Dick LeBeau 2000 12-33-0 0- 0- 0
Norman Strader 1950 8-14-2 4- 8- 0
Frank Kush 1982 11-28-1 0- 0- 0
John North 1973 11-23-0 0- 0- 0
Paul Wiggin 1975 11-24-0 0- 0- 0
Mike Nolan 2005 11-21-0 0- 0- 0
Abe Gibron 1972 7-20-1 4- 10- 0
Romeo Crennel 2005 10-22-0 0- 0- 0
Kay Stephenson 1983 10-26-0 0- 0- 0
Jack Faulkner 1962 9-22-1 0- 0- 0
Ed Biles 1981 8-23-0 0- 0- 0
Dick McPherson 1991 8-24-0 0- 0- 0
Frank Ganz 1987 8-22-1 0- 0- 0
Bob Hollway 1971 8-18-2 0- 0- 0
Bill Arnsparger 1974 7-28-0 0- 0- 0
Frank Filchock 1960 7-20-1 0- 0- 0
J.D. Roberts 1970 7-25-3 0- 0- 0
Hugh Devore 1953 7-18-1 0- 0- 0
Mike Nixon 1959 6-30-2 0- 0- 0
Chris Palmer 1999 5-27-0 0- 0- 0
Marty Mornhinweg 2001 5-27-0 0- 0- 0
Norb Hecker 1966 4-26-1 0- 0- 0
This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 23rd, 2007 at 5:01 am and is filed under General, History. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
"2. Coaches are on a shorter leash now. If his coaching career began in today’s NFL, Tom Landry probably would not have ever had the chance to become Tom Landry. Under this theory, it’s likely that Dave McGinnis, Mike Riley, Chris Palmer, or someone of that ilk is a Hall of Fame coach who will never get the chance to show it."
Would he be a Hall of Fame coach, or would he deserve to be a Hall of Fame coach? I guess that's nitpicking, but it was your rule after all. Anyway, I think Matt Millen uses a similar argument to avoid being fired.
This post inspired a micro-rant:
==
The media here in Western New York has defined Dick Jauron as a "good coach". Let me list his best seasons in order:
1. 2001 Chi 13 wins
2. 2006 Buf 7 wins
3. 2003 Chi 7 wins
4. 1999 Chi 6 wins
5. 2000 Chi 5 wins
6. 2002 Chi 4 wins
7. 2005 Det 1 win
Exactly 1 time has he been at or above .500
Marv Levy's judgment as Vice President of Football Operations is questionable. Jauron is a perennially mediocre coach. He was touted as the guy to bring a Super Bowl championship back to Buffalo. The guy's 2nd best season was 7-9. His single playoff season saw his team get hammered in the postseason.
In Jauron's defense, he seems to be a good coach from Tuesday to Saturday, as the team usually seems fairly well prepared in terms of the game plan, etc., but his gameday decisions suck. They lost 5 games by 3 or less. They're in all their games, but when it comes down to coaching one way or the other, they lose. Just like on Christmas Eve vs the (formerly forward lateral throwing) Titans. It was 4th and 5 in the 4th quarter with about 2 min left. Both Losman and kicker Lindell were on the field shrugging their shoulders. It took valuable time off the play clock before a decision was made to go for the first down. He kills the team in times when a gametime decision must be made.
I'm tired of being told how great he is. In my mind, good coaches make good decisions most of the time. (That doesn't mean it always works, but "good decisions" kind of rule out indecisiveness, in my opinion.)
==
By the way, Doug, have you had any luck simulating the "Super Bowl epoch" thing I mentioned the other day?
As a Browns fan, it's good to see some Browns stuff here! Generally, I think there is a lot to be said for continuity, and I think that owners/fans get too antsy too quickly. Bill Cowher would be the best continuity example, though I'm sure there are counterexamples.
For the Browns specifically, the coach is the least of their worries (though I admit to disliking Butch Davis). The entire organization has been pretty awful since they returned in 99. Just look at their parade of starting QBs.
The browns need to avoid turds like Kellen Winslow in the upcoming draft. Bad luck has contributed as well (Braylon Edwards). I think they'll show significant improvement next year, especially if they draft a good RB with their first pick, and a QB with some potential with their second. Charlie Frye just doesn't have it.
Doug,
I think it's clearly a shorter leash playing the role; which speaks to the broader issue of how the league has changed with the advent of free agency and the costs associated with player acquisition.
One has to consider that every coaching tree, there's logically going to be a wide range of achievement.
Unfortunately for Browns fans...Weis is having success in Notre Dame, Mangini is having success in New York, and Saban has (and will probably have) success collegiately. Crennel may simply be the disappointing protege of the bunch.
I think Cap Era changes everything, so those guys from the Mercantilism period shouldn't be compared on the same level.
Plus any Browns' fans are babies. At least Couch had an injury excuse. If you set up camp with the Texans, Carr is like chinese water torture. That's real unadulterated, gruelling, John Wayne's man's man punishment.
Palmer a missed chance at the Hall of Fame? Mmmm, no, no... and no and heck no.
"I think they’ll show significant improvement next year, especially if they draft a good RB with their first pick, and a QB with some potential with their second. Charlie Frye just doesn’t have it."
Maybe not, but I'm not sure you can write him off just yet. Just for comparison, here's Charlie Frye's stats after two years and the stats for QB #2 after two years:
Frye: 350 of 556, for 3456 yards, 14 TDs and 23 INTs, with 65 rushes for 275 yards and 4 TDs. 4.6 AY/A.
QB #2: 267 of 501, for 3217 yards, 11 TDs and 21 INTs, with 114 rushes for 658 yards and 6 TDs. 4.75 AY/A.
Incidentally, both were second on their teams in rushing yards in their second years.
In any case, QB #2 played slightly better than Frye over the first two years, but not by much.
Now, we don't know what's going to happen to Frye, but we do know what happened to QB #2, also known as Steve Young, who was declared a bust after two years at Tampa Bay and traded to the 49ers, where he became one of the best quarterbacks in NFL history.
Maybe Charlie Frye isn't going to ever be that good, but I wouldn't be too shocked if he turns out to be pretty good in the long run.
What would be a good comparison there, is what happened with the coach following these coaches.
I'm also interested in a subjective view of whether the coach had the ability to make chances knowing that he was going to be around in 3-4 years when the chances would pay off.
Look at Johnson, and most recently Nolan, taking a QB with the first overall pick knowing that they are unpolished, taking over an awful team, and will undoubtedly make the team worse for a couple years. They will be guaranteed a poor record for their first 4 years cumulatively, but by that 4th year chances are they will be on a steady uprise because of the high draft picks and young talent.
If they are canned after 4 years, the next coach will come in and have a much better stint with the team.