Reports: Randy Lerner to Retain 30% of Browns in Sale to Jimmy Haslam; Mike Holmgren out as Team President?

by Cleveland Frowns on July 30, 2012

As the news of Randy Lerner’s upcoming sale of the Cleveland Browns to Tennessee gas station scion Jimmy Haslam set in, we’d started to warm up about the idea that the franchise’s karma would finally be severed from those who assisted Art Modell in carrying out one of modern civilization’s greatest unpunished crimes. So much for that, with WKYC’s Jim Donovan reporting that Lerner will maintain a 30% interest in the Browns at least until Haslam exercises an option “to increase his share in the team [to some unspecified proportion] at some point.”

In better news, it looks like at least one profound Lerner mistake might shortly be erased, with reports that former Philadelphia Eagles President Joe Banner is part of the new ownership group giving way to the conclusion that Mike Holmgren will soon be on the outs. If true, Holmgren’s legacy as Browns President will include:

On the plus side of the ledger, folks will put Holmgren’s hiring of Tom Heckert, a GM who’s assembled a roster that was good enough to become a league laughingstock in 2011 while regressing in every phase, that’s now a consensus pick to finish as the worst team in the league in 2012.

If the Big Show is on his way out, it’s at least an indication of some of the positives we might enjoy with new custodians of the Browns, as much as these new custodians will still be hampered not only by the Curse of Wahoo but also, still, the Curse of Lerner.

—————

In related news, here’s Mary Kay Cabot with the “cannon-armed risktaking gunslinger who’s offering no apologies” thing.

And finally the quote of the day is from Shurmur, on rookie defensive tackles John Hughes and Billy Winn practicing together against the starting offensive line:

“We did that on purpose. They battled in there pretty well.”

Hope everyone’s week gets off to a decent start.

  • AlvaroEspinoza10

    Will agree with most everything on the list. Shurmur’s hiring is the most obvious, egregious mistake/affront to the fan base. Only dispute is to the RGIII trade– as someone has said in here before more specifically, the Redskins offered the biggest trade ever to move up that high in the draft- 3 1st rounders and a 2nd. A trade like that, with the holes in our roster, would have been completely unjustifiable.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      I don’t necessarily disagree with your last point, but the fact is that the Browns tried to offer more than what the Redskins did, but weren’t allowed to because they didn’t follow the rules that the Rams had set up for the bidding.

  • Ron

    Despite having no good counter-arguments to your bullet points on Holmgren, thinking about turning over the entire organization again gives me indigestion.

    Re: Heckert’s roster, there seems to be at least some talent on this team (to my completely untrained eyes) and I’m left wondering if it’s more akin to giving a little old lady (ie Shurmur) the keys to a Ferrari. Just because she can’t drive it faster than 30mph doesn’t mean the machine isn’t capable of more.

    I’ll await the thoughts of the more knowledgeable.

    • Hopwin

      I always struggle to spot talent on the Browns roster. I look up and down the entire 53 man list and struggle to spot more than five guys who would start on any other team, let alone a playoff team. Just because they look better than the guys the replaced does not make them good.

      • ClevelandFrowns

        All one can really say is that Heckert has assembled a roster that was good enough to become a league laughingstock in 2011 while regressing in every phase, that’s now a consensus pick to finish as the worst team in the league in 2012. Also, they’ve gotten younger.

        • bupalos

          Objectively not true.

          • ClevelandFrowns

            Semantics.

          • acto

            Frownie,
            You are a racist and I have grown tired of your anti-semantic remarks

        • Ron

          I guess I am more looking to quantify how much of the laughingstock tag is attributable to the team’s lack of talent and how much of it falls to the coach.

          We know that a great coach can make average players good and good players great. Can’t a significantly bad coach have a similar affect in the opposite direction?

          • ClevelandFrowns

            Sure. I don’t disagree at all.

            While we’re here, does anyone else find the “cannon-armed risktaking gunslinger who’s offering no apologies” thing potentially completely terrifying?

          • Jim

            I’m sure if we look hard enough, we will find at least one article similarly describing Derek Anderson.

          • BIKI024

            if you watch Weeden’s presser, instead of through the rose-tints of MKC’s interpretation, you will hear him say that this is his time to practice the “ristaking” shots down the field since that’s what it is, practice. many of Eli’s, Brady’s, Rodger’s, etc balls are cannon-armed risktaking gunslings in which plays are made (or not) by millimeters. but practicing them certainly doesn’t hurt, especially since he’s practicing every type of throw they have in the playbook.

          • Petefranklin

            If he’s not sucessful with the easier/routine throws, no way should he be gunning longer/harder ones regularly in practice.It’s a waste of everybodys time and Paul Brown would never move on until the rookie grasps first things…first, imagine that.

  • http://www.waitingfornextyear.com Craig Lyndall

    I have a bit of a pet peeve with one of your bullets.

    Simplifying Mike Holmgren’s firing of Mangini to “he didn’t win enough” is so boiled down it is almost an untruth.

    Holmgren did say those words, but he also said lots and lots and lots of other things while specifically saying that the wins statement “wasn’t the only factor.”

    Holmgren said that the system was a big part of it with this quote.

    (On if the next coach will have run more of a West Coast style system)- “No, I don’t think I can do that. In what I tried to do with Eric (Mangini) this year and we talked about it this morning. I said, ‘I wish I could have helped you out more,’ and we had one of those things where we were kind of talking to each other that way. If I hire a coach, I’m hiring a coach. He’s going to run what he runs, what he’s comfortable with, what he knows. Now will it be part of the consideration in the process? Absolutely, but I am not going to interfere that way as a president. I did not do it this year, I’m not going to do it next year and I’m not going to do it ever. That’s not fair. Is it a consideration in this process? I think it is though. Maybe not the ‘system’ exactly but certainly something that I think allows the quarterback in this case in one of our quarterbacks to be successful.”

    Now don’t take this as some blanket defense of Holmgren. He botched the whole Mangini situation and set the team back at least a year with his decision. If he was going to favor his system, he really shouldn’t have let Mangini twist for a year. Firing Mangini a year earlier would have been significantly more humane to the coach and Browns fans than the way it went down.

    So it doesn’t really defend Holmgren and the way it all played out, but I think it is more factually correct than simply saying Mangini was fired because he “didn’t win enough.”

    Holmgren may be incompetent, but it isn’t fair to call him a hypocrite. Maybe that makes me an apologist. :-)

    • dubbythe1

      I agree that it was definitely not the only factor in the ousting of Mangini, however, considering that (at least in the interim) Shurmur has done far less with arguably more talent AND the same philosophy speaks volumes. We shall see after this season because all predictions aside, we still have to play the games.

      I think a strong dose of irony and karma smacking Holmgren in the face would be acceptable in the near future as this unfolds, but I do not think it cuts as deep since Mangini left with 5ish? mil and Holmgren will waltz west with a cool fifty, and this probably does NOTHING to offset Wahoo.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      On one hand, this completely misses the point that what Holmgren actually did matters much more than what he said. And in this case, no matter what he said, the fact that Mangini was dismissed after the job he did in 2010 proves in itself that Holmgren never gave him any real chance to keep the job (as you note).

      On the other hand, Holmgren did actually say that Mangini “didn’t win enough,” and while he did note that there were other factors, the “not winning enough” was the one that he chose to emphasize when asked directly about why he fired Mangini:

      “Unfortunately this business at times and even though it wasn’t the only factor, I want to win here. We want to win here in Cleveland and we did not win enough games this year. …”

      “I think my expectations for the team and for this season were higher.”

      If he’d have come out and said that his expectations for the 2011 Browns were significantly lower than the ones he had for the 2010 Browns, maybe all of it would be more defensible. But he never said anything like that, and actually said the opposite (No excuses!).

    • nj0

      I wonder if Homgren and Mangini will be able to co-exist at ESPN?

      • ClevelandFrowns

        That’s three of Grossi’s top five storylines for the 2012 Cleveland Browns season.

  • BIKI024

    “regressing in every way”, yeah, especially in age when we were one of the oldest roster’s in the league prior to Heckert taking over GM. The Front Office has done a great job of hitting the much needed reset button on the roster and building it mostly from scratch as there were only like 6 guys on the roster when he took it over who were homegrown Clownies.

  • bupalos

    I have no doubt I’m going to come off as a paranoid, but when Marcellus shale hit Haslam moved into Pittsburgh and became a 1000% fan, and now Utica shale is hitting and he’s moving into Cleveland.

    http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000081556

    every time they call it “clean” or “green”, you need to remember

    http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Environment/2012/06/25/shale-gas-coal-premier-bc/

    His brother charged with looking after the future of the family business became the governor of Tennessee:

    http://www.metropulse.com/news/2011/may/04/tennessees-new-oil-and-gas-drilling-regulations-ig/

    Ohio is a swing state tipped this way and that most powerfully by the suburbs around Cleveland. At arguably 0 cost, Haslam just acquired about as much subtle influence as it’s possible to acquire at one go.

    • Petefranklin

      If the modern day environmentalists didn’t cry wolf about every single insignificant endangered bug this water polution thing might actually not fall on deaf ears. What a shame, people possibly dying because the Sierra club flexes it’s muscle in all the wrong places.

      • bupalos

        Right. The sierra club is to blame. Gotcha.

    • Cranky M

      Fracking is the absolute worst. It’s going on in my area at the moment, and everybody refuses to believe that it is harmful. “Well, the gas companies said it’s safe.” I hope they remember my warnings ten years from now, when their drinking water is toxic.
      Carry on….

  • fatscatback

    I think that presenting this as an unadulterated good is a bit hasty. One of the major drums being beat by the Sportstime Ohio crowd about this transaction is that the Cleveland Browns will finally be joining the modern NFL.

    In this narrative Lerner is being presented as the dutiful son who honored his dad’s wishes by not plastering the-corporate-name-of-the-week on the stadium and keeping ticket prices within the reach of the common man.

    The flipside of this story is Haslam who is a hardheaded businessman who will leave no money on the table because he will fully exploit all the marketing, sponsorship and revenue streams that are inseparable from the modern sports franchise.

    This is something that seems tailor-made for this blog (and its followers) to really sink its teeth in and explore instead of just throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    Especially given the fact that this could be a long season of deadening sameness given the gauntlet that the NFL is calling a schedule, an offensive coordinator who is smarting from the power struggle he waged with the Favre, and Shurmur (nuff said).

    • NeedsFoodBadly

      Those are great angles. It will be really interesting to see how things go with the advertising and ticket prices.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      Will definitely keep an eye on this.

    • bupalos

      >>>>The flipside of this story is Haslam who is a hardheaded businessman who will leave no money on the table because he will fully exploit all the marketing, sponsorship and revenue streams that are inseparable from the modern sports franchise.>>>

      Given the fact that his interest in Pilot will be around 20x what it is in the browns, I would add “political capital” to your list of things he will be looking to exploit. #swingstateblues

      • Petefranklin

        So I guess if Ohio votes for a democrat the Browns will be moving again? Maybe southern Ohio will save the Browns.

  • GrandRapidsRustlers

    I will go on the record as saying that I like Heckert.

    The problem is that if you have a hierarchy of Lerner, Holmgren, Heckert, and Shurmur he almost wins by default.

    The number one positive is that we have now removed the stain of Art. I already don’t think much of owners and I sure as hell don’t care if Lerner is a minority owner.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      If guy would be on platform at potential (entirely theoretical and completely impossible) Super Bowl celebration, stain is not gone, which is the main problem addressed here.

      • GrandRapidsRustlers

        Understand your point and agree…that platform chance is about as great as Sizemore coming up in Game 7 of the World Series and using his dick to hit a grand slam to win it all.

        Translation: I’m not all that high on the Browns.

      • bupalos

        Sins of the father are visited upon the sons to the point that it’s better to have one of the countries biggest global-warming profiteers/fracking fan/Republican political operative wipe away that stain. You sure?

        • ClevelandFrowns

          Of course not.

  • ChuckKoz

    sucks about that minority owner thing, but whatever. all i know is that – even as a big-time liberal with a general disdain for right-wing oilmen (Haslam) and right-wing governors that don’t believe in evolution (his son, who presumably learned such ignorance from his oilman daddy) – I am thrilled to have a new owner in town. From reading his profile, I have some assumption that he will be the type of owner that shows up at owners meetings and actually cares.

    • BIKI024

      actually the new owner is the “right-wing governors” brother.

      • bupalos
        • BIKI024

          oooooooh, the big bad Romney fundraiser, how dare he, how DARE he!?!?!

          • bupalos

            Easy how he dare. He has no shame and could give a fuck about anything other than ensuring the government helps him get all the money and ruin everywhere and everything instead of just most of it.

            I’m surprised you would be outraged Biki, but then considering the flaming lefty link you posted earlier from Reich, I guess I can see it.

          • BIKI024

            i thought you were the flaming pinky??

          • BIKI024

            you obviously have issues with the GOP and “big-energy”, free country son, go right ahead with the hate mongering.

          • bupalos

            >>>you obviously have issues with the GOP and “big-energy”>>>

            Gee, you think?

          • Petefranklin

            I guess if our team is o-fer sept and oct., we can always talkabout the election here.

    • bupalos

      Oh he cares. I have no doubt he cares. About what I’m not sure.

      This guy is unlikely to make or lose what he would consider significant money from the Browns. It will be several hundred million this way or that, no big deal. The pilot/flying J business, the largest distributor of transportation fuel in the U.S., is currently 18 times more valuable than the Browns, and it’s future growth trajectory may be largely determined by energy prices and by the ‘natural gas economy’ of which Ohio’s Utica shale is currently the center.

  • NeedsFoodBadly

    Frowns, honest question here. How do you perceive Jim Brown’s pattern of behaviour towards women?

    The troubling number of abuse accusations is what comes to my mind when I think of him and what keeps me from viewing him as the greatest Cleveland Brown. I think you’ve discussed this previously, but I don’t recall what you said, and I’m interested in anyone’s view on this. He does a lot of good work for civil rights, is a legendary player, etc., but those accusations I find very upsetting.

    • dubbythe1

      I will chime in on this, but not on his stance toward women, but more of his demeanor and bravado when talking about his old station as mentor to the Browns.

      This is only my opinion but I always felt JB set our young men up to fail in a way by attempting to instill the sort of pride, dedication, and work ethic he shouldered as a young professional. Unfortunately I think Mr. Brown failed to grasp the circumstances of the era that shaped him, and the huge difference(s) from the upbringings/philosophys of the young men he was trying to help, souring his idea of pride into their rendition entitlement, dedication and work ethic into laze, and this small detail (among others) perpetuated and eventually consumed our young professionals and even Mr. Brown himself into the feelings of “they need me more than I need them”, which is truly unfortunate.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      Of course the accusations are very upsetting, but little to no supporting details have emerged to support them, so it’s hard to have much of a perception other than what you’ve expressed.

  • Ronnie

    Let’s wait until we hear a purchase price.

    Assuming the moves Holmgren made to update the team’s front office/infrastructure enabled a big increase in franchise value, I’m sure Lerner would consider his reign a success.

    After all, Holmgren’s boss is Lerner, not the fans.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      LOL yes, no doubt Lerner will be able to purchase a small island with all the extra money he’s going to make due to all the improvements Holmgren has made in his time as Browns president. Keep us posted on the purchase price breakdown.

  • bupalos

    I admit to feeling especially cranky today, but I hate the idea that your stance on this looks like it is going to be overrun by St. Eric.

    If I thought the owner mattered, I would have been blase last week and I would probably hate them today. I’ve been meeting more and more of these southern-twanged right-wing big-energy phonies lately, most of them telling me how shitty my town was and how it has to be sacrificed for the good of god and country.

    From a football point of view there’s no reason to believe we are worse off with this owner other than the implied instability. From a social/civic point of view, the new owner is, on the face of things, a disaster compared to Randy. He’s as bad a politically motivated global warming profiteer as you could likely find, and he already has a home town where he charitably invests the loose change in his pocket to salve his conscience.

    Fortunately, from a football point of view, I stand by the idea that modern owners matter very little and very few of them give 2 shits about football per-se, they are buying revenue streams and trying to capture huge public dollars in stadium deals. The further you go up the line from fan to player to coach to gm to president to owner the further you get from what matters about a football team. The fans are what caused the value of this team to double during a decade plus of total breakdown and bad luck and suck and the fans are why I love the Cleveland Browns. The fans ARE the Cleveland Browns. So I continue to love them. But this is not progress.

    • BIKI024

      yeah it seems you’re displacing your anger of these recent meetings on a guy who isn’t in “big energy”, he is a glorified convenient store owner that also sells gas. they have no involvement in refinery or drilling, etc. global warming profiteer because he’s a reseller of gasoline?? i mean, good grief.

      and there are ways that an owner can also improve the brand equity, by being involved with the team, fanbase, community, etc. while of course as like with Dan Gilbert we’ll probably see an increase of Pilot or Flying JJ ads around the stadium, it seems that he will be an upgrade over Lerner.

      • bupalos
        • BIKI024

          um, which of the 100+ videos on that link are you suggesting i view?

        • BIKI024

          either way, don’t see how a gas station owner is in the same category as “big energy”.

          • bupalos

            Sorry…http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000081556

            Gas station owner? How about the largest distributor of diesel fuel in the US, now refitting to deliver CNG for over the road “because we have 100 years of natural gas.”

          • BIKI024

            yes, gas station owner.

          • BIKI024

            from what i remember from class, diesel fuel is “better” for environment than natural gas anyhow, especially as of late with advancement in diesel technology

          • Petefranklin

            I have 4 diesel vehicles. Does that mean that I’m green?

          • nj0

            Do you see the corner boys as not being part of the drug trade?

          • BIKI024

            child please

    • nj0

      Maybe I’m missing it, but where has Frowns defended or said anything positive about the new owner? This post seems more interested in slamming Holmgren and Lerner. Hating the old doesn’t imply loving the new.

      • bupalos

        Progress, however slow. This isn’t progress.

  • bupalos

    That might be the best caption I’ve read in years, BTW.

    • dubbythe1

      the only thing that was missing was “Flash”

    • CleveLandThatILove

      That’s what it’s all about.

  • Jim

    What a difference a few days makes. Friday the Browns were being sold outright, the Indians had just come off a great series win over the Tigers. By Sunday, it became known that Lerner was still planning to keep a sizeable stake in the Browns and the Indians just finished wrapping up their third place finish in the AL Central by being swept/clobbered by the Twins 28-6!

    • NeedsFoodBadly

      Cleveland sports, man. What can you say?

      But in good news, anyone catch Cleveland native Terrel Gausha’s literal last second KO in the first round of Olympic middleweight boxing? Guy is a fighter, and goes up again on Thursday.

  • nj0

    Considering that Holmgren very well could have known back in April that he might be on the way out, I’m kind of glad he didn’t pull the trigger on RG3. His legacy is questionable enough with hitching his wagon to a QB that new management might not want while also trading away future drafts.

  • Roosevelt

    Agree with Bupalos above that it is silly to still invoke Mangini in talking about whether Holmgren’s gotta go. I was all for keeping Mangini, and I agree that last year was a regression. Heck, I was dead against the results of the most important draft under Holmgren. But none of the current options involve turning back the clock. The choice now is whether to keep the current leadership in place, or to demolish and rebuild AGAIN from the ground up.
    Right now, Heckert has begun to assemble a team that will, one hopes, be more cohesive than the series of teams that were cobbled together by three successive incompetent regimes. Right now, there is (time sensitive) hope at quarterback, at RB, offensive line, and WR. The defense might take a step back because of the injuries and as the games get closer. The defense also might improve as they have a little more time off the field, courtesy of our hopeful offensive line and stud RB.
    The worst possible result is to have a new regime come in, fire Holmgren, attrition Heckert a year later, and institute yet ANOTHER new system that will not make concessions to the abilities of Taylor, Sheard, Haden, Little, Gordon, etc. We need to let things settle, see which of the new players are keepers, and unless there is no progress at all this year, proceed via minor tweak rather than major overhaul.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      His decisions re: Mangini are a significant part of Holmgren’s legacy here and it’s actually insane to pretend otherwise.

      • Roosevelt

        The proportion of Holmgren’s legacy is arguable, because while he did either keep him around a year too long or let him go a year too soon, the presumption when a new regime comes in is that the old one is out.
        But regardless of Holmgren’s “legacy”, what should concern us now exclusively is what is best for the team going forward. And as the guy who just said the presumption is that the old regime is out, I am worried that the result will be taking a wrecking ball to a team that is starting to come close to a critical mass of competent players.
        If this new guy, Banner, wants to a. Improve on the current regime, and/or b. run the team, then he can start by firing Shurmur or dictating that Shurmur rely on veteran assistants. If Shurmur needs replacing, it should be with someone of the same school/mindset. Then, when Holmgren’s contract is up, Banner can step in and replace him.
        If you’d prefer to avenge Mangini, we are looking at four more years of hell, trading away the quality players that Heckert brought in or at the very least expecting them to learn another new system. I guess the good news is we’ll have a good shot at Matt Barkley.

        • ClevelandFrowns

          It’s not about avenging Mangini, it’s about taking an honest look at the way Holmgren has conducted business here. Anyway, we already have a fine shot at Barkley.

          • BIKI024

            when are you jumping on the UNDER 4.5 wins bandwagon big boy???

          • Petefranklin

            Why would he? The under 5.5 train runs on the next set of tracks.And if Weeden sucks, you know that we’ll get the third pick thus eliminating Landry Jones from consideration too.

  • CleveLandThatILove

    Wondering if an increased sense of urgency will be evident in Berea and at the Stadium once this thing changes hands. Somebody needs to light a fire under Shurmie, so this might get good.

    • BIKI024

      from all media and twitter account posts, and pressers i’ve seen is that there definitely seems to be a sense of order and urgency, and of course optimism. “Shurmie” and the players seems to be pretty happy with how camp is going so far.

      • CleveLandThatILove

        You know what I mean…Uncle Mike coddles him. Let’s see what fear of an objective job performance evaluation does for Pat.

        • bupalos

          I don’t think Pat has any problems that fear can solve.

  • nj0

    I’m in love with every Snorg t-shirt girl.

  • Bryan

    Some interesting stuff to consider

    Banner was supposed to be President of the Eagles through 2013, but changed his role to “Advisor” in June 2012. It seems likely that he knew Haslam was buying the Browns and wanted to free himself up to help there, no?

    It also seems possible that the Big Show has known about the possible sale of the Browns for months, and, thus, has known he may get a “out of jail free” card. If that was the case, then all of his brash talk about major improvements and “playoff tickets” would be pretty funny in retrospect. My guess it that he would happily leave the steaming pile of sh*t behind and jet back to Seattle.

    • BIKI024

      the playoff tickets talk was well before June, I believe it was before last Thanksgiving from what I recall, halfway through the season.

      it seems reasonable to presume that the talks weren’t in a serious stage by the draft either, but does seem like they knew something was in the works before the supplemental draft, allowing them to be a bit more aggressive in gambling on Flash Gordon.

      • http://twitter.com/byRiverBurns River Burns

        Wasn’t the playoff ticket talk at the train wreck presser to answer questions about why McCoy wasn’t tested for a concussion in Pittsburgh in December?

        • BIKI024

          ur right, dec. 15, still doubt that the negotiations were heated 7.5 months ago.

          • Bryan

            I checked. First public rumors of a sale were June 2012 and the playoff ticket talk was well before that, so it doesn’t line up well.

            I still think that it’s possible Holmgren knew Lerner was considering selling for quite some time, and had a sense his contract would not play out fully. Of course, precisely how long is pure guesswork.

  • bupalos

    I seriously doubt this is just some good old boy that wants to spend his time playing with a football team.

    My first prediction on this is you are going to start seeing and hearing a hell of a lot more advertising from Chesapeake Energy. They bought the buckeyes, and now they are buying the Browns.

    http://porkchopdiaries2012.blogspot.com/2012/03/where-it-makes-sense.html

    I know I sound like a drunken Cassandra riding a one-trick poney through the Berkely campus, but the reality is everything about Northeast Ohio is about to be tied to and colored by resource extraction, largely for global trade. It’s going to be bigger than you think and happen faster than you think. A few of us canaries are catching the fumes now, in 10 years we’ll all be huffing it.

    • NeedsFoodBadly

      What do you think can be done, though?

      I’m as worried about climate change as anyone, but I’m extremely pessimistic as I think we’re past the tipping point anyways, and that powerfully politically entrenched energy businesses combined with people’s desire for comfort are an impossible obstacle.

      Oil and coal suck but there are environmental drawbacks to “cleaner” technologies like nuclear power, solar, and natural gas, as you well know. And energy efficient vehicles like hybrids and electric cars have their own issues with rare earth metals and battery disposals, I think.

      I just don’t know how we maintain the current standard of living through the next few decades, and I don’t see people willingly giving it up without a major fight. So I’d love to hear some positive solutions, if you have any, ’cause when I think about this stuff, I just get sad.

      • bupalos

        Sounds trite, but what can be done and has to be done is simply on the personal level. People individually have to come to understand that it’s morally and ethically wrong to live the way we do now. Not “unsustainable.” Wrong. Dumb. Low class. Mean-spirited.

        Then little by little live a different, better way. And as a side effect, become happier. Because there is very very little about the profligate use of resources and the undying quest for ease that actually makes people happy, and a lot that makes them sad, even absent the nasty side effects.

        One thing I do is heat my house solely with wood. I love every part of it, sweating and freezing and being sore and getting muddy and wet and tired. It’s kind of hard, and yeah, it’s a tiny thing in the grand scheme. But doing it doesn’t make me sad at all, quite the contrary.

        There probably isn’t one tipping point or binary on/off equation to climate change and environmental degradation. Unless everyone is wrong and/or humanity can turn on a dime, we’re going up at least the 2C. If that’s the “tipping point,” yeah, realistically you have to say we’re going past it. That doesn’t make things less urgent or lessen the good one can do. The question to me is whether the Bupettes are left with effects that are uncomfortable and inconvenient, or which destroy what we currently think of as quality of life completely.

        And natural gas via fracking is objectively dirtier and more destructive than anything else in your list there including coal, it doesn’t belong on the “cleaner” side however many quotes you use.

        • nj0
          • bupalos

            Yeah, a fireplace fire is not generally a good thing at all from most environmental considerations. I personally burn in a gasifying wood boiler that is extremely efficient and clean burning with flat panel steel radiators that can be controlled quickly and easily by zone.

            My setup is pretty deluxe, but a simple downdrafting woodstove is also very clean. And however you burn wood and get out the btu’s you are offsetting that much carbon.

          • nj0

            Googled. Sound cool. How much do one of those run though?

            For the record, I agree with you on all this. But I am also, sadly, in the camp with NeedsFoodBadly that change that matters is impossible thanks to existing institutions.

            I realize that is self-defeating, but here I am.

          • Petefranklin

            I made my own heat-a-later since they no longer sell them. Sometimes I have to open a door just to be comfortable. All the new houses here dont have woodburners, too bad for them.

          • bupalos

            >>>Googled. Sound cool. How much do one of those run though? >>>

            I did my setup all myself, cost about 6G all in, probably would have been double if I wasn’t doing it myself and scrounging a bit. I bought under a tax credit in I think 2008. Pricey, but I’ve saved about 5G in fuel bills to this point.

        • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

          ‘what can be done and has to be done is simply on the personal level.’

          thoughts follow, but first more of the same story:

          after installing the residue of the extinguished brazilian rainforest i was somewhat embarrassed that such lovely trees had to die for my (truly) POS condo. i thought afterward, should i have used bamboo? and then i realized, my not purchasing that product will do nothing NOTHING to contract the market for cheap brazilian cherry stair treads. along the same lines, installing the hideous flourescent ‘energy-saver’ bulbs really only achieves creation of a hideous purple pallor on your skin where there was once warm incandescent light. it does provide the purchaser/installer of those hideous lights with a false sense that they’re making a difference. but in fact, theyre figuratively clicking like button to end hunger. they are NOT making a difference, but they THINK they are making a difference and thus take their foot off the gas when it comes to meaningful change. (and oftentimes cop a moral superiority thing against anyone who doesnt use ‘energy saver’ lights.)

          these are things that have to be led at a national level. rancorous debate and blaming rich white guys obfuscates the problem and absolves supposed eco-friendly legislators from trying to pass laws that affect change.

          god. you know our govt found $30M to fund this? stop wasting my money on trying to be my mom!

          • bupalos

            >>>and then i realized, my not purchasing that product will do nothing NOTHING to contract the market for cheap brazilian cherry stair treads>>>

            You won’t know that. Your purchase might have been the tiny straw that pushed some manager somewhere to go ahead on that next 200 acres.

            My take on that is that I’ve stopped doing the calculus and just do what I know is right and which I think will make me more proud or less embarrassed to tell my grand kids about. “You used to drive 1000 miles a week pepaw? You dumped all this carbon and it’s made life a living hell?” “Well scout, I mean, everyone was doing it, and if I hadn’t done it too it wouldn’t have made much difference anyway…so…that’s just how things were…”

            I don’t disagree at all on whether these things would need to be addressed at a national and international level to have any kind of significant effect. The question is how you get to the point where it might be so addressed. It’s not by proceeding as usual on the personal level. When individual lifestyles change, it may not effect the larger systemic much itself (or it might, like voting or like the 200 acre thing, sometimes things move in quantum) but it makes that change more likely. If you wanted to ban tobacco, the first thing to do really would be to stop smoking, tell people how bad it is to smoke, and get as many people as possible to quit. You do good at the time and pave the way for further macro level change. I think you should be able to understand the politics of that.

            >>> and oftentimes cop a moral superiority thing against anyone who doesnt use ‘energy saver’ lights.>>>

            I find most of this totally incongruous to the folks I know. The ones advocating for big sweeping national changes are generally also the ones reducing their personal use. The ones making fun of tire gauges and fighting fuel economy standards and bitching about the tyranny of the CF and freaking out at carbon trading and trying to make it as easy as possible to drill baby drill are not somehow being stopped from their grand environmental plans to pass a gas tax because they’ve been demoralized by people who are too goody-two-shoes taunting them with light bulbs.

        • Hopwin

          If I am reading your arguments correctly, the only way to correct the situation is for everyone to act responsibly but you are only demonizing Pilot J as opposed to calling out Americans as the weak, stupid and short-sighted society we have become… seems contradictory to me.

          • bupalos

            >>>have to come to understand that it’s morally and ethically wrong to live the way we do now. Not “unsustainable.” Wrong. Dumb. Low class. Mean-spirited.>>>

            Not sure what you think that is meant to apply to, but in fact I am calling out the American way of life simply.

            Entities like Haslam’s couldn’t tell the lies they do or manipulate laws the way they do if people weren’t predisposed to believe them. If you read that RS article on the new global warming math, it has the aptest phrasing I can think of: It’s like we’re trying to build the gay rights movement almost solely out of southern evangelical ministers.

            Can we retire the jersey on the term “demonizing” on here? You can’t really demonize the people who sneak around 6 years early and change all the laws so they can pile up tons of money while destroying your home, using up common resources, and squirting toxic waste all over the place. That’s simply and objectively what they do.

          • ClevelandFrowns

            Even Mitt Romney’s Mexico Jesus would agree with the basic principle that those who have resources and power (and a nationwide chain of gas stations) have more responsibility than those who don’t, all else equal. What’s your problem?

            Traveling today. Should have an extremely important post up circa 2pm.

      • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

        what can be done? good question. i have some no-brainers below, but first a story:

        here is are the stairs i did a couple weeks ago. each solid cherry tread was $90 and that’s with hand applied side reveals and front moulding. here is a satellite view of the result of the harvesting of brazil’s rainforest.

        nuf ced?

        what do to? or what can govt do? here are four starter actions (not solutions) from your old pal kanick that address environment, debt, healthcare.

        1. halt imports of exotic woods. (US cant tell countries not to exploit their rainforests but it can withhold the largest market.)
        2. raise gasoline tax to be on par with european countries. (the surest way to reduce consumption is to increase the price. also increased revenue retires debt.)
        3. eliminate mortgage interest tax deduction. (why on earth does the govt encourage people to take on debt? and increased revenue goes straight to retiring national debt.)
        4. outlaw the sale of cigarettes. (supposedly our govt is concerned about our health –> eliminate the preeminent contributor to bad health. isnt this an easier and faster way to affect more people than taking over 20% of the economy or telling me to wear seatbelts?)

        part of the reason i’ve risked being unpopular here by expressing counterpoints is because i *do* find the demonization and partisanship so very counter-productive. you guys are better than huffpo and msnbc. i really think this. but the fact is that the democrats have had every opportunity to introduce (and pass with their majorities) all of the measures above. instead, though there is just so much blame those rich, flaming sociopath republicans. that’s crap and you know it. you lefties need to hold your own guys to account instead just continuing this prevailing falsity that if you want less government, youre mean and ‘regressive.’ please.

        the fact is that no pols are willing to lead with unpopular measures and the more they can create wedges between righties and lefties the longer they’ll get away with it. but in twenty years, your kids are gonna confront all these problems.

        • NeedsFoodBadly

          Interesting ideas.

          1. reminds me of bans on things like importing endangered animal products like ivory and crocodile. This seems to me easy to implement. Beautiful stairs, btw.

          2. Will not happen anytime soon, and that goes double in a recession. People would be up in arms and it would slaughter certain segments of the population economically.

          3. YOU’RE KILLING THE MIDDLE (any?) CLASS (is what people, not me, would say) Outcry would be tremendous.

          4. This seems possible, but it seems to me really odd that when we’re moving towards more liberal marijuana laws, based on the idea that prohibition is impossible, not particularly cost-effective, and generally a waste of resources, tobacco is getting outlawed. In San Francisco, they’re trying to ban all outdoors smoking (except medial marijuana, oddly) even while allowing that it is impossible to enforce. Also, I don’t have the numbers in front of me, obesity/diet may have greater effects on our healthcare system than smoking. it’s gotta be close.

          Absolutely agreed on demonization. Everything in life is complex, and all partisanship does is reduce things down to an absurd, meaningless level. What you say about unpopular issues is really the key point here. I think point 1 might fly politically, but I think the rest are just incredibly unfeasible in the current political climate. We need big changes, but i don’t see those changes ever occurring.

        • nj0

          “the fact is that no pols are willing to lead with unpopular measures”

          Doing anything that matters means you need the majority of Americans to act against their own current best interests. They need to grow up and deal with some nasty, hard stuff.

          In short, don’t blame the pols cause we’re the ones who want/need cheap energy.

          Pogo had it right – “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

          • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

            there once was a pol who was very courageous in publicly going against his primary campaign pledge. you all remember ‘read my lips no taxes.’ but do you remember that ghwb was dealing with a tip oneill house? and that a gridlock or shutdown was imminent unless someone compromised? and thus he compromised on his absolute main platform plank.

            obviously this alienated his base. and did the democrats thank pres. bush for reaching across the aisle? for doing what was best for the country?

            they did not.

            if any one can think of a courageous — “i’m risking my seat here.”* — politician since then, i cant.

            *fwiw, i put LBJ in this category too. i dont personally agree with much of the great society, but dammit that’s the last time a president really and effectively LED in terms of shaking things up.

          • bupalos

            That was the last Republican I voted for! But I really don’t think he lost for the reason you cite. He lost because Ross Perot soaked up a bunch of traditional republican support and Clinton was just a killer.

            Unless you’re saying Perot came in because of the tax thing, could be something to that.

          • nj0

            It’s funny that Perot ran on a “balance the budget”, “fiscal responsibility” ticket and, in the process, ensured that our last fiscally sane President couldn’t get re-elected.

          • Petefranklin

            Jimmy Carter got crucified for his war on energy, at least he tried. And he was the last non career politician in the White House except for maybe Reagan, coincidence?

          • bupalos

            >>>Doing anything that matters means you need the majority of Americans to act against their own current best interests. They need to grow up and deal with some nasty, hard stuff.>>>

            That’s right and that’s why personal habits have to change before these political cure-alls are possible.

  • nj0

    I’m hearing something familiar in the complaints of the Holmgren faithful-

    “Finally, we were going in the right direction and now they’re going to tear it all down. Well, hopefully the talent he acquired won’t be lost during the rebuild or misused by the new regime.”

    Granted, the situations aren’t perfectly analogous (Mike had more time, for example), but it sure looks like Holmgren backers are going to experience what Mangini supporters went through – namely the anger that their guy was on the right track but ownership and politics got in the way.

    That’s not to come down for or against either Mike or Eric.

    It’s just extremely depressing that all Browns fans, whatever side of the issue they picked, will most likely end up experiencing the same bitterness and disgust. Lerner selling kind of renders all the arguments, debate, and investment of the last five years completely pointless; it was just wheel spinning.

  • Brian Sipe

    That laundry list would be funny if it was not so damn sad…. All I know if Mangini woudl have won 7 last year easily with that simple schedule. Wake me up for the next coach who can beat Pitt, NE and NO

    • Petefranklin

      Playoffs! Pass the bath salts please Bup.

    • BIKI024

      Oh there they go. There they go, every time I start talkin ’bout brownies, an italian man got to pull Eric Mangini out their ass. That’s their one, that’s their one. Rocky Marciano. Eric Mangini. Let me tell you something once and for all. Rocky Marciano was good, but compared to Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano ain’t shit.

  • rodofdisaster

    I’ve been saying it for a while: Stealing Lerner’s Money.

    Has anyone else been noticing the biased reporting on Weeden coming out of camp so far? It seems like Zac Jackson (ta da!) is the only one reporting that this kid is making a lot of mistakes (he tweeted it at some point). It seems like every other report is remarkably vague.

    That isn’t to say that he isn’t better than Colt or Wallace. I’m just tired of the sham “competition”. We all know it isn’t a fair one and that barring a total implosion along the lines of a white bronco, lines of coke and underage hookers…he’s getting the starting QB job.

    Rule #1: Life isn’t fair.

    With that said, I think that Weeden will benefit from a better group of 10 guys around him than McCoy had last year. Some guys will play better but Richardson and the improved OL will make a big difference. That may not translate into wins but we know that Shurmur is essentially a rookie coach so we can give him a pass.

    • BIKI024

      have you gone to camp yet?

  • Fauberto Hernandez

    I agree with most Frowns posts but is out there. The Mangini love on this thread is laughable. He was an all right coach, much of that was due to Rob Ryan, but he had no business making draft decisions. Brian Robiskie? Really? H&H is the best FO the Browns have seen since their return. If dropping Mangini is what they felt they needed to succeed then so be it. I would have loved RG3 but he was way overpriced. Losing out on him was a blessing. Jim Brown was the greatest, but let’s be honest, kind of an ass. The Seattle connection kind of bothers me, but being away from home I can understand the desire to return. Finally, I think most of us have contempt for the major news outlets. I see Frowns post weekly taking aim at your favorite targets (MKC and Grossi).

    And lets not be hasty to trust the new owners and potential FO. Being around Pittsburgh and Philly does not guarantee success. An overly involved owner can be just as bad as a disinterested one. Just ask Dallas and Washington. Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t.

    • rodofdisaster

      Do you know exactly how much was due to Rob Ryan? 4.6%? 27.5%, 90%? No, you don’t.

      How good was Rob before he got to Cleveland? His Oakland defenses were not exactly the model of consistency. When I look at Rob Ryan, I see a talented football coach with no eye for detail and discipline. That’s where Mangini helped him.

      Brian Robiskie? You’re really criticizing this pick? Per NFL.com:

      “The most polished receiver in the draft falls to the Browns at No. 36. The former Buckeye is an exceptional route-runner with outstanding hands and ball skills. Though he isn’t a classic deep threat, Robiskie is a big-play threat capable of being a productive No. 2 receiver in the Browns’ offense.”

    • nj0

      I realize it’s difficult to separate the personnel from the system, but….

      Rob Ryan defense’s # rankings by yards:
      30, 27, 3, 22, 27, 31, 22, 14

      By points:
      31, 25, 18, 26, 24, 21, 13, 16

      I don’t get the Ryan love. Not to say he’s bad, but he’s no Dick LeBeau

Previous post:

Next post: