The Cleveland Browns' coaching search process is a tale that never fails to captivate and confuse. It's like a never-ending soap opera, with each season bringing new twists and turns that leave fans scratching their heads.
The stories that emerge years later are legendary, offering a glimpse into the inner workings of a franchise that seems to operate in a unique, almost bizarre, manner. It's as if the Browns have their own set of rules, ones that only they understand fully.
For instance, there was the time when Jimmy Haslam, the team's owner, asked prospective coaches what he should do while interviewing them! And then there was the candidate who was brought in for an interview two years in a row, only to interrogate the interviewers about why he should even consider the position after being overlooked the previous year.
Haslam's actions are a prime example of the Browns' unconventional approach. He once called a coach he had just fired weeks earlier to seek advice on hiring a new one. It's a move that raises eyebrows and leaves many questioning the team's decision-making process.
Fast forward to the present, and the Browns have just appointed Todd Monken as their new head coach. A move that has left many scratching their heads, wondering how this decision came to be.
While some might criticize the hire, it's important to note that Monken has his supporters. An NFL coach, speaking on condition of anonymity, praised Monken as the best 'football coach' among the three finalists.
However, the Browns' methods continue to make them an easy target for jokes. The recent viral incident about essays and questionnaires, while perhaps exaggerated, does highlight a certain lack of clarity in their approach.
I reached out to sports executives who have hired head coaches, and their opinions were divided. One executive said, "Data is good, but it seems like you'd need it if you don't know what you're looking for. Leadership is hard to capture with data alone."
The Haslam family's desperation to win is evident, but their strategy seems to be lacking. It's almost as if they don't know what they want, or how to get there.
So, here we are again. The Browns have fired Kevin Stefanski, who has now become a hot commodity on the market, while they struggle to fill a position that many see as undesirable.
How do the fans who clamored for Stefanski's departure feel now? Would they have preferred Monken as a replacement a month ago? These are the questions that linger.
What's clear is that Haslam seems to be repeating his past mistakes. His unorthodox approach led to the hiring of Sean McDermott in 2016, but he ignored the data and went with Hue Jackson instead.
Stefanski was on their radar in 2019, but Haslam sided with general manager John Dorsey and chose Freddie Kitchens. They corrected that mistake a year later, but the damage was done.
Now, with an analytics-driven general manager in Andrew Berry, the Browns had an impressive candidate in Nate Scheelhaase, a young, offensive-minded coach who checked all the boxes. But Monken was the surprise choice.
Regardless of what's said at the press conference, this feels like another Haslam hire. After all, the owner hires the head coach, every time, in every sport. A general manager or team president can recommend, but the final decision rests with the owner.
The Baltimore Ravens seem to be the only organization that's honest about this. When owner Steve Bisciotti was asked about quarterback Lamar Jackson's role in their recent coaching search, he was clear: "A lot of say, but he has no power. I have the power."
This is the reality with every owner in every sport.
As for Jim Schwartz, his future with the Browns remains uncertain. I've heard that the Browns were pushing Schwartz on all their prospective candidates, which is a strange twist indeed. It's normal for a team to encourage a head coach to retain a coordinator, but mandating it, especially with someone like Schwartz, seems counterintuitive.
Could this lead to a power struggle with a young, first-time coach like Scheelhaase? Or with Monken, who at least has more experience and might be better equipped to handle it?
Given Schwartz's recent behavior, it's hard to see him returning. Haslam could throw money at him to smooth things over, but that's a temporary fix at best. It's not fair to Monken, who has waited a lifetime for this opportunity, only to have one of his first questions be about Schwartz.
This situation isn't necessarily doomed, but the process that led here is certainly odd. Monken is known for his directness and ability to tell players exactly what he thinks, which could be a good thing.
Another coach, another clean slate. But when will the Browns truly figure out what they want and how to get there?
