Gold Mines and Browns Watches: More on Randy Lerner’s Sale to Jimmy Haslam

by Cleveland Frowns on August 9, 2012

It’s easy enough to understand why the local reaction to Randy Lerner’s sale of the Browns to Tennessee gas station scion Jimmy Haslam has been almost universally positive. Selling the team to anyone who will keep it in town gives Browns fans as much to celebrate as they’ve had in a decade and a half.

The record under the Lerner family’s ownership speaks for itself: Click here to continue reading at CleveScene.com.

  • BIKI024

    good work Frownie, but just curious about your research on Randy “having no discernible previous success in any business at all.”

    just because there was obvious nepotism in him being a Director with MBNA for 15 years, and Chairman for the final 4 years prior to the sale to Bank of America doesn’t take away from the fact that the sale was a huge success and that Randy with his Columbia Law degree probably didn’t hurt with his reported involvement with that transaction. I mean, if he was that much of a colossal failure of a businessman, far worse could’ve happened during his tenure and exit strategy. and since his investment firm(s) are all private businesses we really have no clue how he fared with those investments, so it seems to be just a shot in the dark on whether he had previous success or not. there are plenty of rich men who make their millions quietly and aren’t “discernible” from the average layman.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      LOL. Tell me more about Randy’s “reported involvement” with the MBNA/BoA transaction so that we might discern something to overcome the reality that all manner of success is possible in this world despite the presence of detrimental factors (like “obvious nepotism”). I wouldn’t make too much of Columbia giving a degree to the heir of one of its most generous alumni benefactors, though. And there’s probably also something to be inferred from the fact that none of his investment firm(s) exist anymore.

      • Beeej

        Didn’t you wrote about a $150 (?) million mutual fund that Randy invested in that consisted of 90% his money, and his inability to get the money out?

      • BIKI024

        i’m just saying, you seem to make a pretty big leap in assuming you know what his involvement or (lackthereof )with MBNA was (or prior business engagements). other than the Browns, which he obviously has made money with, and Aston Villa, we really don’t have much in the public domain. it seems to me your resentment towards the guy is clouding your judgement enough to make such a wide broad stroking swipe at the guy. and as far as what investment firms he is involved with anymore, we would have no clue about that, he’s a freaking billionaire, and a private citizen, it seems pretty reasonable to assume he has his investment tentacles in more than just 2 pro sports teams. whether they are failures or not, i guess that’s what the mystery of Randy Lerner is: bum who inherited fortunes and blew it all away, or is he the fortunate guy who is blessed to have the trappings he has and has invested it wisely. seems to me that he could be somewhere in the middle, but we still have no way of confirming unless he runs for public office and bares all.

    • http://twitter.com/cpmack Chris M

      I’m not sure that Lerner understands that he’ll get buried trying to spend with the likes of Abramovich and Al Nahyan (and even Malcolm Glazer, really).

      We’ll see what kind of businessman he really is if he can survive in the EPL and not end up bankrupt in 10-15 years.

      • http://twitter.com/cpmack Chris M

        And speaking of Glazer, this is what happens when a guy (who also happens to be a greedy asshole) has an EPL team to pay for and also owns an NFL franchise:

        “The team owner (Malcolm Glazer) put his three trust fund kids in charge of the team. Their first act after “saving” the team from being moved out of town was to hold the county hostage with an offer of “increase sales tax by 1% to fund a new stadium or we’re moving to Orlando.” And like the dumb redneck sheep we are, we approved the tax.

        As part of the stadium deal (not made public) the Glazer family gets to keep all the money for parking, concessions, etc. for ALL events held at the 100% publicly funded stadium. They were also given the property west of the stadium gratis and were given money by the county to build a new headquarters/training facility. Also, they don’t have to pay property taxes on any of these buildings, further bankrupting our local government.”

        http://deadspin.com/5932876/why-your-team-sucks-2012-tampa-bay-buccaneers

        So we could be better off without Lerner before he has to implement changes like this in order to take on Man U-sized transfer fees

  • ClevelandFrowns

    This week’s Scene is all Haslam, btw. Here’s two more pieces from the same issue, including the revelation that dude gave money to Josh Mandel.

    http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/souther-man/Content?oid=3026917

    http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/the-reluctant-heir/Content?oid=3026985

    • BIKI024

      re: keith’s article, which was great btw, gotta love the research on that one! i read that “Big Jim” grew up an east coast guy, in Philly and NYC area, attended Lower Merion High School (Kobe’s alum) before accepting a football scholarship at UT and winning a national championship. As most central and southern ohioans know, alums from winning programs usually get great jobs from their name recognition, which obviously worked for “Big Jim” down there in Volunteer country.

    • p_forever

      pretty sure you get kicked out of the club if you are a billionaire republican and haven’t contributed to mandel’s campaign. i think the revelation might be that the amount wasn’t higher.

      look at it this way frownie: if jimmy typically backs only winners (that’s the conclusion scene made, anyway – “whether bagging a corporate merger or helping his candidate win, he gets results”), and if he only coughed up $35oo to mandel, it probably means he’s pretty sure sherrod will win this fall, therefore he just gave mandel a nominal amount to pacify his friends in the billionaire republican club.

      welcome back to the good old usa, buddy.

      • http://twitter.com/cpmack Chris M

        “Pretty sure you get kicked out of the club if you are a billionaire republican and haven’t contributed to mandel’s campaign.”

        “Wait, it’s not John Mandel?”

        • p_forever

          it should say “not sherrod brown” – then no one would get confused.

  • FakeHaslam

    twitter.com/fakehaslam

    • Petefranklin

      Bad jokes man. Give it up.

      • wiseoldredbeard

        This, on the otherhand, was a good joke.

      • actovegin1armstrong

        Right Pete F, a bit of a bad taste marathon.

        And I thought I was clueless, this guy gives me a run for my money.

  • Davekolonich

    I get the “be careful what you wish for” argument, but I also feel that the Browns were in a decade-long holding pattern under Lerner – who simply was born into ownership. Certainly, Haslam sees the advantages of a built-in fortune (“subsidized” is wildly accurate), yet I would think (hope) that the new owner is willing to build a tangible management structure that doesn’t allow four head coaches and four and a half GMs in one decade. Post-Lerner, all a Browns fan can truly ask for is basic competency.

  • http://www.redright88.com/ TitusPullo94

    You touched on one of the points I took from Haslam buying the team. While both he and Lerner come from privileged backgrounds, Haslam at least worked at the company from (somewhat) the ground up.

    Now, obviously, he advanced from 14-year-old pump jockey to CEO of the company because his father owned it (not a career path open to anyone else, I dare say), but at least he worked for the company.

    I’m also comforted, somewhat, by the fact that he has been a minority owner in the league for a few years.

    While owning an NFL team is an ego thing for all the owners, Haslam just didn’t wake up one day and decide to buy a team to show off for the boys at the club or to compensate for other physical or emotional shortcomings (think Dan Snyder). At the very least, he got his feet wet with the Steelers and hopefully learned some things about the league before taking the plunge into full ownership.

    At least that is what I’m hoping.

    • BIKI024

      Randy worked at MBNA for 13 years, starting from when he was 31.

    • p_forever

      i fail to see why the fact that you’re an elite yet don’t admit that you are one (see, e.g., billionaires talking about how they are really folks like us that worked hard and made it to the top) are any better than billionaires that just act unabashedly like billionaires. they might even be worse.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/opinion/brooks-why-our-elites-stink.html?_r=1

      look – i too am hopeful that our new owner will be better than our last one. but the fact that haslem fancies himself somewhat “self-made” is not evidence in favor of that fact.

      • bupalos

        It does sound like he works hard and I think he’ll be a better “owner” than Randy was in most ways.

      • actovegin1armstrong

        Exactly p_4,
        I have money tree friends who have used that power and privilege to do go things for our general public and I have money tree friends who are complete selfish jackasses.

        It makes very little difference when someone is “self-made” or not.

        • p_forever

          Acto – I know I’m right when i see eye to eye :)

          • actovegin1armstrong

            Eye to eye?
            Those heals must really make you tall.

          • p_forever

            They super do. And yes – I meant when *we see eye to eye.

      • http://www.redright88.com/ TitusPullo94

        I don’t know if Haslam presents himself as being self-made and I certainly don’t look at him that way. I was just trying to figure out how this mega-rich owner will be different than the last mega-rich owner.

        I go into it in further detail here: http://tinyurl.com/c2phzvw and here: http://tinyurl.com/clu9ch4

  • Bryan

    This post fits in better with debates from previous days about Haslam’s moral compass, but I post it here in the hope someone might actually read it. Apologies if its off topic for today:

    If someone is concerned about an over-consumption of energy (particularly fossil fuels), the solution is to try to decrease the demand of that energy relative to other forms of energy. As long as billions of people across the world demand cheap energy, then it will profitable for businesses to figure out ways to supply them that energy in a cheap manner. For example, by writing this blog, Pete is demanding energy that powers his laptop. By buying any product not made in Cleveland, Pete is demanding energy needed to ship those products to him. Assuming Pete is careful with money, I suspect he also demands low prices for all of the consumer products he buys. This creates strong demand for the cheapest of energy. For the most part, everything everyone of us does on a daily basis creates demand for cheap energy.

    Jimmy Haslam’s sins, as far as I can see them, are that he figured out a way to provide cheap energy to people and make a bunch of money doing so – just as Pete figured out how to provide quality legal services to the many people that demand them. It seems really odd , then, to hold Jimmy Haslam morally accountable (or label him morally objectionable) for any perceived over-consumption of fossil fuels. He did not invent the product and then impose it on society. Rather, every day every one of us makes many decisions that create extra units of demand for cheap energy. Jimmy is just part of the supply chain that provides us that energy. Whatever cheap diesel fuel that wasn’t sold on his watch would have been sold by some other business man. Remove Jimmy and nothing much changes,

    Yes, I am sure you can find some corporate shennigans or objectionable lobbying behavior tied to his name and business, but those issues are tiny relative to the monstrous, global, consumer demand for cheap energy that we all create everyday (and once you start talking about the demand from countries like China and India, forget about it). Thus, it seems really odd for a bunch of people to spend lots of time powering their laptops in order to write long comments on blogs about how horrible it is to consume energy. It seems even more odd to use this moral compass as the basis of supporting/not supporting a local football team.

    I have real concerns about global warming, but I try my best to be realistic about how those concerns can be addressed within a society that is based on cheap energy. Over time, as fossil fuels become more scarce and more costly to produce and technology for alternative energy sources become more efficient and more cheap to produce, fossil fuels will die because they won’t be able to satiate our demand for cheap energy. While we move down that path to cheaper, cleaner forms of energy, there are many tough decisions to be made, none of which present clear, “correct” answers at this moment n history. But what I am 100% certain of is that how the Browns’ owner happens to make a living, and how it fits into the supply chain of our society’s demand for energy is of very little moral importance to the future of our planet.

    • BIKI024

      COTY nominee??

      • bupalos

        cop-out if the year?

        • actovegin1armstrong

          Way off topic….
          Bupa I love you, but you just helped the greatest problem on this planet, the burgeoning proliferation of people.
          I am certain that the genius Bupettes are wunderkinds that shall save us all, but still….

      • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

        please. artificially cheap energy maintains consumption status quo? finite exhaustible resource demanded by growing developing economies/population = unprecedented crisis? and haslam has nothing to do with either?

        you dont read my posts, biki?

        © 2012 kanicki

        • BIKI024

          oy vey

    • dubbythe1

      >>Over time, as fossil fuels become more scarce and more costly to produce and technology for alternative energy sources become more efficient and more cheap to produce, fossil fuels will die because they won’t be able to satiate our demand for cheap energy.<<

      Unfortunately, the current billionaire club has influence over regulators and lawmakers that in effect slows down this process, or halts it altogether, as they milk every-last-cent from their fossil cash cows. As we approach the inevitable (as evidenced with fracking) these same few people will allow (or try to allow) more damaging and reckless methods to sustain their livelihoods.

      • https://twitter.com/jimkanicki jimkanicki

        the billionaire club isnt holding gas prices low. the billionaire club doesnt have a mass panic attack if a refinery goes offline and the pump price spikes 50c.

        but you know.. let’s blame billionaires and tax em more too. that’ll fix everything.
        /obama’d

    • bupalos

      Yeah, that goes back to the issue of scale. If I personally buy shirts and like prices cheap, I can’t call out someone who pays politicians to make child labor and sweatshops legal? To me that’s an ethical cop-out and would be even if the stakes weren’t as big as they are.

      The big players in this industry do not make choices for you, but they do have outsized control in the system that dictates what the available choices will be. That’s why they all are heavily involved in politics, and it matters a ton. All the developed countries that have half of our per-capita carbon footprint didn’t all turn off their laptops. They have regulation that makes fuels start to reflect their true cost, and they make public investments in alternative sources. Jimmy and his ilk spend tons of time and money fighting in the opposite direction. It’s not because they are bad people, it’s because of the position they are in.

      Pilot’s aggressive move to provide frack gas for trucking will probably be one of the single largest moves to keep the cheap hydrocarbon treadmill going. Would someone else do it if he didn’t? Sure. People will convince themselves of anything for money, they will kill for money. That’s not news. Does that mean it’s not fundamentally wrong?

      It seems to me that this thinking is only made possible by folks not believing the seriousness and reality of global warming. As equally true as it would be, you wouldn’t make this kind of argument about even a low level Nazi guard probably, because now after the fact you accept the barbarity of what happened. But the reality of the fact is that if science can be believed, millions of at-risk people are probably going die. Granted a lot of them are in India and Bangledesh and Indonesia and places we seem to have a hard time caring about. But it’s going to make life worse for everyone.

      >>>It seems even more odd to use this moral compass as the basis of supporting/not supporting a local football team.>>>

      I’m not doing that and I don’t really hear others saying that’s what they are doing. The Browns are MINE, whatever the character of the current carpetbagging fraudster who collects the excess income. This is a separate issue, and my only concern about posting on this particular version of the fraudulence of NFL ownership is that I suspect this investment has as much to do with supporting Pilot as it does with making money by it’s own lights. NE Ohio is about to become fracking central and fracking is 100% dependent on political support because it requires the suspension of traditional legal protections for the environment and personal property rights. That’s all.

      Go Browns.

      • Bryan

        The point about lobbying is important. If fossil fuel guys were the only ones lobbying, then I agree there wold be concerns about whether alternative energy forms has a fighting chance. But this is simply untrue. Alternative energy is a HUGE multi-billion dollar industry with massive clout. Each side is driven by capitalists trying to make money, each using the rules to their best advantage. I live in SF and know a ton of entrepreneurs who are getting tons of money from huge VC firms. VC guys are smart, and they know that alternative energy is the future, and they put their money where the mouth is. Fossil fuels are going down eventually.

        All that said, I agree there is legitimate concern about the magnitude of the environmental externalities fossil fuels will produce before they lose out to alternative energy forms. That debate, of course, gets into the science of climate change, and how extreme the causal effects of the by-products of fossil fuels are. This blog is just not a place I want to open that pandora’s box. I think there is clear evidence that greenhouse gases have caused climate change. However, there are also a lot of sensationalist claims about other environmental events being attributable to greenhouse gases that are simply unsupported by science. Richard Muller, a physicist at Berkeley, is the best guy out there discussing the limits of climate science, what is known and what is sensationalized.
        http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/aug/03/scepticism-climate-study-richard-muller

        Finally, in terms of the cop-out argument, let me clarify: I am not saying that because you use laptops, fly on planes, buy products that are delivered to you using diesel fuel, etc., that you can’t criticize the energy industry. What I am trying to bring to light is the complexity of the “moral” issues surrounding climate change. There is no single scapegoat and there is no simple solution to the problem. I think a lot of your points are interesting and important, I just don’t understand how you can have such strong moral conclusions about Jimmy Haslam when you are he are part of the same system.

        • humboldt

          ” you [and] he are part of the same system”

          Sorry, but this is just lazy reasoning.

          Obviously, as part of a 21st century economy, we are all invariably dependent on fossil fuels. However, many of us have spent time learning about the consequences of our consumption and seeking ways to cut down our personal emissions. We are adjusting to environmental realities, making reasonable lifestyle changes, and trying to use our modest purchasing power to create demand for alternative energy sectors. It is a slow process, but some progress is being made.

          Haslam, on the other hand, is using his immense power and influence to advocate for the status quo, consequences be damned. He is trying at all costs to preserve a system/supply chain that most reasonable people understand has to change, if not for ecological reasons, for reasons pertaining to diminishing supply. He is inspired by a desire to produce wealth – that is all.

          To lump us all together as being in the “same system” is just so simple-minded and obscuring of the actual practical and moral issues at stake.

          • Bryan

            See original post. Massive demand for cheap energy by essentially every business and individual in the world is the reason Haslam exists. Haslam is not to blame.

            And if you want to go down the path of assigning differential moral blame, how much blame do you assign to “cool” companies like Google and Apple who consume massive amounts of electricity (from fossil fuels) to produce their products? What is the cut-off for a person being morally objectionable? How much of their wealth must be associated with exploitation of cheap energy?

            I work at a consulting firm and consume tons of electricity every day. The partners of my firm make good money. Are they morally objectionable because they pursue profit using electricity from fossil fuels? Do they have a moral duty to seek other work that relies only on alternative energy sources? I don’t know the answers to such things.

          • humboldt

            I’m not going to try to defend Google or any other multinational company, but they are at least attempting to enact a comprehensive plan to reduce their carbon footprint: http://www.google.com/green/

            Haslam’s business model is built on capitalizing off the the resource that is driving climate change, and he therefore has no financial incentive to adapt to the critical emerging reality of a warming world. He willfully chooses to continue driving fossil fuels forward. I consider that monumentally irresponsible, and certainly more irresponsible than Google.

            I’m not saying this isn’t a complex issue, but if we can’t make moral claims and rather embrace the notion that we’re all somehow equally complicit, we are totally deluding ourselves.

        • bupalos

          What Humbolt said. You act like the Browns are responsible for the Steeler’s touchdown because they are on the same field*. Yes, I play in Jimmy’s world. But I do things to try and mitigate my use (no fossil fuel for heating at Casa Del Bup, vegmobile in the works) and support curtailing externality, whereas Haslam, as is natural and expected by his position, tries to increase overall use and externality. We’re pushing at different endzones.

          >>>Fossil fuels are going down eventually.>>>

          A whole lot lies in that “eventually” that is highly dependent on not having the attitude of laisse faire inevitability you seem to be speaking for. They can frack here and around the world for decades. They can dig up and boil the tar sands for decades more (hello xl pipeline). There are tons of hydrocarbons left they are just vastly more damaging than what we’ve used so far. This seems to me to be a deciding moment in what direction we’re taking on this. But we’re just not making the decision at all. Which is the decision guys like Haslam are pushing for, because they rule the status quo.

          *Scratch that. The Browns usually are responsible for the Steeler’s touchdown.

      • BIKI024

        again, not all fracking is bad, particularly if proper due diligence and protocols are adhered to. the problem right now is that it’s the wild wild west out there and everyone with any land is drill baby drilling to try to hit the jackpot and it’s unfortunately causing real issues that definitely have to be addressed and hopefully our elected officials and EPA can have the resources to properly regulate. high levels of science, engineering and construction goes into properly executing, a majority of these gold rushers obviously do not have such infrastructure or resources to execute properly.

        it seems to me that if a guy like Jimmy Haslam is going to invest $300 million as you say to refit his stations, I’d have to imagine he is going to protect his investment and make sure the drilling is done legally, effectively and efficiently, which typically requires the same protocols as doing it safely (no leaks, proper waste removal, etc).

        i just google Pilot, fracking. fracking, haslam, and have not seen any controversial issues with his involvement yet. amazingly, much to my surprise, the 3rd highest response was one of your previous comments where you are thrashing his name to pieces.

        • BigDigg

          If you have Netflix – check out ‘Gasland’. If you don’t have Netflix, still might be worth it to track it down given everything going on in the area.

          Short answer here is that Fracking is a disaster for the environment and water sources. There’s precious little regulation to-date and unfortunately huge exemptions to EPA staples like the Clean Water Act. The government let the big boys have at it without any real restrictions or testing. They’ve predictably dived head first into this, making the science up as they go along. Scary stuff…

          • BIKI024

            seen it, definitely a well done flick that gives a decent background of the situation, but he tends to exaggerate a bit on the facts, which tends to happen when the director, Josh Fox is an activist who wanted to make people aware, and he did.

            i didn’t feel both sides of the argument were fairly presented, but in this case they don’t need to be, it’s his movie and he can put in whatever he wants. and as njo said, hopefully it continues to create awareness of the people to demand that proper regulations and oversight is in place, i’m all for that. but there’s just as much evidence to support that when done properly and all safeguard measures are met (which are plentiful), that it can be a safe source of energy.

          • Hopwin

            This is part of the problem. We now get our information from directors. We used to have journalists who would present scientific evidence from both sides of most issues. Sadly that era has come and gone.

          • bupalos

            I agree that Gasland exaggerates certain things (especially acting like methane itself is highly toxic which isn’t especially true unless it blows up like in Bainbridge). I also don’t think it covers the really major concerns very well. In short, I think that fracking is actually quite a bit worse than is presented in Gasland and for overall different reasons of emphasis.

            I appreciate your attempt at evenhandedness, I admit I’ve lost that in the personal nature of the threat to my family. But I would ask exactly how you think fracking can be done safely when it requires (utica wells) at least 5 million gallons of water per well (up to 8 wells per pad, spaced up to 1 pad every square mile) and generates a commensurate level of waste that is always high saline, usually high in heavy metals, mildly radioactive, and laden with a toxic brew of chemicals. Even under the best possible regulatory case, where do these trillions of gallons of water go and how do we know they get there and stay there? What is the externality of taking all that water permanently out of the water cycle? That’s just one aspect of it, and I just don’t see how that can be managed even if we had a benevolent dictator.

            I won’t dispute that they might find alternate methods if they had to. But they don’t have to, that’s kind of the point. As soon as they figured out they could do it, all the energy has been applied to changing the laws, and not by the wildcatters so much as by the Chesapeakes and Pilots.

        • nj0

          As an aside from the Haslam issue:

          I’ve made this comparison before – the wild wild west thing and waiting for government regulations is exactly the same thing I heard during the housing bubble. The feet on the ground saw it happening, demanded something be done, and our leadership dropped the ball.

          This is why, even though I’m not as educated or invested in the fracking thing, I applaud the people who keep bringing up the issue.

          I expect most frackers probably do the bare minimum in terms of protecting the environment. That’s how the market usually works. And that’s why it’s important to get serious regulations in place and why it’s correct to rail against interests that promote the opposite.

          For the record, I’m not saying that’s Haslam. I don’t know enough to speak on that.

          • Jim

            Typically, protecting the environment costs money. Money that Fred the Fracker would rather not spend. This is where shortcuts are taken. Like not properly cementing waste ponds which allow the fracking sludge containing 500+ unknown chemicals to seep into the water system.

            It makes complete sense to take a step back, really weigh the pros and cons of the fracking “boom” that is approaching our doorsteps, and then draft regulations that ensure this is done in as safe a way as possible. This of course, is how functioning democracies work. In other words, this is not what has happened or will happen here.

          • BIKI024

            agree 100%. but as it pertains to Haslam, I really doubt these guys are so short-sighted to half-ass a frack job and create a huge publicity nightmare for him, his family, his brother with political ambitions, and of course their brands.

          • nj0

            As a bystander in this conversation, I do agree with Biki here that the Haslam’s seem very conscious of their public images.

            Not sure if that’s a pro/con necessarily.

    • Hopwin

      Perhaps you are new here. Haslam isn’t morally bankrupt because he is “big energy” he is morally bankrup because he is 1) Rich and/or 2) A Republican.

      • humboldt

        On behalf of the people actually trying to have a thoughtful discussion about a complex issue I am pleased to honor you with the “Least Helpful Comment of the Day” award

  • Brian Sipe

    Let’s talk about something more impportant now… Fujita and Haden putting D in a horribel spot… injuries happen but this stuff is silly stuff they F’d up and hurt the team with

    • BIKI024

      no decision handed down on Haden yet, and even if they do he can appeal and the suspension wouldn’t begin until after the appeal. but when one man goes down, it’s another man’s chance to bring their lunchpail to work and make a name for themselves. hearing great things about Sheldon, Dmitri, Skrine, even Wade as far as DBs to fill in if Joe does have to sit. same goes for the LB corps, it’s obviously early, but Maiava and JMJ lookin good.. they better bring their big boy pants though because they are gonna get a lot of reps.

      • nj0

        Do any athletes actually bring lunchpails to work? If not, one should start. And just fill it with Ritz crackers.

        • humboldt

          And Capri Suns

          • nj0

            I’d shave my head if Shurmur ever did a presser while pulling on the straw of a Capri pouch.

        • NeedsFoodBadly

          Shurmur does the ritz cracker/lunchpail thing, actually.

          • nj0

            Also wears a hard hat. Aramark owns, supplies, and launders those golf shirts and khakis.

          • BIKI024

            and Haslam fuels their trucks. one big vicious cycle. woe unto america!

          • nj0

            And somehow Bob Lamonte represents them all.

      • humboldt

        Any chance Haslam could pay Jason Grimsley to crawl through the NFL ceiling panels and swipe Joe Haden’s adderall-laced urine?

        • nj0

          I’d like to think Albert still has Grimsley’s number on speed dial to take care of any problems that might arise.

      • bupalos

        Have you been out to practice Bik?

        • BIKI024

          i was in town last week and wanted to go on Friday, but it was the day Haslam was being announced so i decided to stay away from the shit show.

    • bupalos

      I’m just as ready for Fujita to step aside anyway. But this Haden thing is atrocious. That guy really is the lynchpin of that (thin) secondary and with the lineup of receivers we’re starting the season with it’s going to be ugly.

      • BIKI024

        i’m not so sure how thin our secondary is, especially with Hagg, Skrine, coming along and having a healthy TJ. reading good things about James Dockery and Trevin Wade too. Jauron and Ray Rhodes are specialists when it comes to teaching/coaching the secondary, so hopefully they all got to spend some quality time this past offseason and into training camp.

        • ClevelandFrowns

          This is the most Superfan thing ive ever read.

          • BIKI024

            right, because it’s IMPOSSIBLE for NFL talent to progress, IMPOSSIBLE i say!

          • bupalos

            Trevin Wade? You’re putting me to shame Biki.

        • actovegin1armstrong

          I like TJ, but what do you think about his coverage skills?
          I have often thought that he turns the wrong way or jumps simple fakes.

          • BIKI024

            i think many rookies don’t come in a full player, they typically progress with more experience and coaching they receive, especially guys who seem to put in as much work as TJ has as well as his athletic ability. i think his time off helped him get a better perspective of coverages, etc and hopefully this entire year of working with the coaches has helped him as well. but obviously, the proof is in the pudding, so we’ll see.

      • BIKI024

        Yes, Trevin Wade. looks like he’ll be making the team, especially if Haden is out.

  • Art_Brosef

    I keep trying to go to ClevelandFrowns but I end up at Gawker. So weird.

    • ClevelandFrowns

      Cheddar Bay starts in like four weeks, bruh. Hang in there.

      • Art_Brosef

        Trying my best, I promise.

      • actovegin1armstrong

        WOO HOO!!
        Thank you Frownie, I get my gambling fix.
        I just wish my essays were as erudite as Rod’s.
        I love Cheddar Bay!

    • bupalos

      If you weren’t so a-scared out of your mind of Libruls you would perhaps have the presence of mind to make a better analogy. It’s more like http://grist.org/ I’d say.

      • Art_Brosef

        Holy mother of fuck Bup.

        I never said anything about being scared out of my mind of “Libruls.” Many, if not the majority of, my friends that I interact with on a personal basis, Pete included, lean that way.

        Also, I dont need, nor do I appreciate you commenting on my “presence of mind”, as you have no knowledge of either. Especially when Im merely make an-off- the-cuff comment just to lighten the mood, which Pete clearly understood. You clearly didnt. But as usual, your stereotypes, judgments and conclusion jumping have reminded me why I comment around here less and less.

        • nj0

          Everyone in Clevo-blogosphere Land has been combative this whole week.

          11 game losing streaks and ownership changes do that to us.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TtGQnyPZ6g/

          edit: too dumb to embed this properly

        • bupalos

          Hey apologies. I was trying to be lighthearted too in a similar way… guess it backfired. You seemed to be cautioning Kanicki not to engage in these discussions before, so I was tweaking on that and at the same time calling myself out for turning this into Grist. We don’t know each other well enough for tweaking. Sorry. And I’m aware that I should shut up about the fracking crap, it’s just very very in my face right now and it happens to have a big connection to this new “owner.”

          I do think you’re basically wrong about whether these discussions are useful and whether people can stay civil, overall Frowns is a pretty great place for that.

          • Art_Brosef

            When did I say these discussions arent useful? In fact, I believe quite the opposite, which is a main reason I frequent this site.

            I cautioned Kanicki because conservative views are rare around here, and consequently discounted and often ridiculed as a result of other commenters reveling in the majority, which tends to turn what would otherwise be a civil discussion into condescension and judgments.

            I dont doubt your intelligence and I am sensitive to the issues that effect (OR IS AFFECT I NEVER CAN TELL!!!!) your life. But, in my opinion, you are very quick to paint republicans with a broad brush, a brush that I try hard not to use, especially in this forum.

          • bupalos

            I’m misremembering probably. I thought you basically told him to wise up and not waste his time or some such.

            Doesn’t matter. I agree I’ve been in closer to murder mode than I probably should. I owe you a shot.

        • actovegin1armstrong

          Even though we are probably diametrically opposed on some things Art, I still enjoy your comments.

          For example, I have very opposing views about most of the world than my co-workers. Oftentimes we go to our favorite bar, drink beer and argue for twenty minutes, eat some apps, then watch the sun set.
          After that we just drink beer and laugh, the arguments are gone for another day.

  • mo_by_dick

    Burning everyone in the comments here a copy of my environmentalism mega-mix. You guys are gonna hate it.

Previous post:

Next post: