"Strong Leadership"

Browns owner Jimmy Haslam wants "strong leadership" in
his next head coach, and that's a good thing.

As we all know, yesterday was was a very Black Monday around the NFL with seven head coaches and five general managers losing their jobs—Pat Shurmur and Tom Heckert among them.

This, of course, was no surprise, including to at least Heckert himself. I'm not going to re-hash everything that's gone on with the Mike Holmgren-Heckert-Shurmur triangle, because in the end it doesn't matter. When Jimmy Haslam decided to spend a billion dollars to buy the Browns in August, those three never had a real chance to keep their jobs.

And it makes sense. I'm sure I've said this before—and I'll probably say it again—but when you spend a billion dollars to buy something, you get to do whatever you want with it. And I've never been that big of a fan of Shurmur anyway, so to me he's no big loss.

What's important now is to find the right man to lead the Browns on the field. And that's what leads me to to title of this post: Strong leadership.

When asked the qualities he's looking for in a head coach, Haslam gave that two-word answer. That's after being a part of Steelers ownership the past few years, and then watching Shurmur throughout the season. And it's also after doing a lot of research with CEO Joe Banner over the past few months.

So what might "strong leadership" mean a little more specifically?

Well, in my opinion, it certainly doesn't mean Shurmur. I know Holmgren basically set up Shurmur to fail—a first time head coach with no offseason and no offensive coordinator was a horrendous strategy—but if you just look at the guy and compare him with coaches that have won recent Super Bowls, Shurmur just doesn't stack up.

I'm talking about coaches like Tom Coughlin, Mike Tomlin, Mike McCarthy, Sean Payton, Tony Dungey, Bill Cowher, Bill Bellichick, and Jon Gruden—those are the coaches who have won Super Bowls in the past 10 years. There aren't necessarily tangible reasons for this, but you can say that all of those men are strong leaders. Each one of them passes the "eyeball test" for that. They're all accountable for decisions they make—whether good or bad—and they're not surly or condescending to the media (...well, with the exception of Bellichick for that one). But they certainly don't look like they're cluelessly sleep walking through the game on the sideline.

Because Super Bowls have only been won by these types of men in the last 10 years, I think it makes sense that Haslam and Banner want to find a coach first and then go after a GM or Director of Player Personnel. Yes, finding players is important, but coaching up those players and creating schemes that put those players in positions to win is arguably even more vital to success.

What I don't think, though, is that "strong leader" is code for "Nick Saban" or "Chip Kelly." Sure, those men have had good success at Alabama and Oregon, respectively, but I feel Haslam is talking more about an "it" factor than anything else. Whatever "it" happens to be, it's the same factor that has led all the aforementioned coaches to winning the Super Bowl.

So far, reports have surfaced that Syracuse head coach Doug Marrone and Arizona Cardinals defensive coordinator Ray Horton will interview for the Browns job. And, of course, everybody thinks Chip Kelly and Nick Saban are on the short list. I agree with Terry Pluto, though, in that I'd like Colts offensive coordinator/interim head coach Bruce Arians to at least get an interview, and I also wouldn't mind seeing Penn State head coach Bill O'Brien get a look.

But in the end, I just want Haslam and Banner to get it right. It's not about pleasing me or any other fan. As Haslam said yesterday, "If we win, [the coach will] be embraced."

He couldn't be more right.