Davidson In ?!

It simply says "the Browns interviewed current offensive assistants Jeff Davidson and Rip Scherer for the coordinator’s job". It did not say "rejected".

Just because you don't end up in a position you interviewed for doesn't mean you were rejected.

 

I guess it's point of view, or what you choose to believe. If you want to paint him as a less qualified guy, it's easy to ignore being promoted to assistant head coach or being wanted by a few teams, us obviously included.

 

Oh, I agree.

I just find it amusing that Collin says

"We have no actual evidence that Mangini ever asked the Browns to interview Davidson"

but says matter of factly that

"Davidson wanted the Browns job, interviewed for it, and was turned down."

even though both statements are based on interpretation.

 

How is it a matter of interpretation? It is a fact that Davidson expressed interest in the Cleveland OC job. It is a fact that Davidson interviewed with Savage for the OC job. It is a fact that he was not hired. Meanwhile it is also true that we have no evidence to suggest that Mangini ever asked the Browns for permission to interview Davidson.

There is no interpretation there, you just want to see things a certain way because you want to disagree with me. Unfortunately it just ends up making you look foolish. Put facts above feelings. Even though I can't stand magnus, I accept his statements when they're valid.


magnus:
You are lying, which is what you normally do when you realize that you can't win the argument on facts. You lied about me saying that Davidson was a bad hire when I never did. You lied about me saying that hasbeen's article was wrong when I never did. Now you're lying about me disputing everything reportedly positively about Davidson when I'm certainly not.

I like the fact that Davidson worked under Weis. I like the fact that Weis endorses him. I like that he's worked with the offensive line. I like that he's young and seemingly bright. You're the one who is dismissing anything negative being said about Davidson. Of our options, I'd rather have Davidson than McCoy or Zampese, but that doesn't mean that we need to whitewash all concerns.

 

These are facts.

What is not a fact is this (the part in bold):

You are assuming that Davidson not being hired means that the Browns turned him down.

I'll give you an example. When I decided to leave Bank of America, I went for an interview with Food Lion. I was not hired by Food Lion, and went to work for a different company.

Now, if you are an uniformed outsider, you might assume that I was turned down. This would be incorrect. They actually made me an offer. I turned them down. Not the other way around.

In the case of Davidson, it is entirely plausible that he decided that the position was not for him. It was said that he and the Browns GM clashed, so this is a viable. Perhaps he realized that the Browns were a drowning organization and wanted to get off that boat. Maybe he wanted some interview practice.

None of us know the minutiae of what went down between the Browns and Davidson, but we don't know who turned who down. Assuming that you do is what makes you look foolish.

 

No, it obviously isn't, and you're only arguing otherwise because you feel like making an ass of yourself since you're still bitter towards me. Look, Davidson knew what Savage was like. He'd worked there, he knew the players, and he still wanted to get the Cleveland OC job. He tried to get it, Savage interviewed him, and Davidson was passed over for someone else. There was no report of him pulling his own name from consideration the way that Sarkisian did, and it's downright ludicrous for you to pretend that Davidson did. The only reason you're saying something so obviously asinine and foolish is because I'm the one who said he got rejected. If anyone else had said it, you wouldn't have uttered a peep, and you know I'm right about that.

 

I'm not (OMGz ur A lier!!!). I'm just not hanging nearly my entire opinion on that statement. I don't know what happened in Cleveland, and neither do you. To say he's less of a coach because he wasn't hired there in 2005? Seriously?

and can we stop this silly ass "liar/coward/bitter/stupid" shit? You look foolish when you stoop to that.

 

First of all, comparing it to Sarkisian is silly. First of all, coordinator interviews does not get nearly the amount of hype that head coach interviews do. Secondly, the reason that Sarkisian turning down the Raiders got so much hype is due to the shenanigans going on in Oakland to begin with AND the fact that is seemed absolutely crazy that the guy was even offered the job to begin with.

Secondly, you're again assuming he actually wanted the job. I actually went into the Food Lion interview knowing that unless they absolutely blew my doors off, I wasn't taking the position. But I felt I needed to do my due diligence and that a little practice wouldn't hurt.

It's even possible that maybe he was turned down, but not due to his performance or his ability, but due to the organization just wanting to clean house. Perhaps Savage just didn't like the guy and didn't want to deal with him.

It's not at all ludicrous to consider any of these situations.

You simply do not know what went down. Hate to break it to you, but just because you declare something to be fact doesn't actually mean it is.

It's not even that I disagree with you. It's just that you make such a big deal about "we have no proof that Mangini requested to interview him" and then make assumptions about the Davidson situation. If you're going to be such a staunch demander of proof, you don't get to make assumptions when it helps your cause.

 

Please stop comparing an interview for a position as offensive coordinator of a National League Football team with interviewing at god damned Food Lion. You make a complete ass out of yourself with idiotic analogies like that. People do not simply interview for NFL jobs for the hell of it, not in the least because if they did then word would get around and they would not be asked to interview for other positions.

Some Cleveland people were fired, while Davidson was not. None of those fired people were brought in for interviews, so clearly he wanted the job and he clearly had a legitimate shot at it. The fact is that he wasn't judged to be the best candidate.

Of course it is. You didn't even deny the fact that you wouldn't be saying any of this if I hadn't been the one talking about Cleveland turning him down. I credit you for that, because as much of an ass as you make of yourself, you're apparently not down to magnus' level in terms of lying to try and win an argument.

 

And you know this because you've interviewed for offensive coordinator positions? I wasn't not off interviewing for "stock boy", I interviewed for a position with significant responsibility at the corporate level. I agree that it's not the same thing, but it's in the ball park. Perhaps you have some interview experience you'd like to share with us, oh wise one?

And as for "people do not simply interview for NFL jobs for the hell of it", is it not true that one of the biggest drivers behind the "Rooney Rule" to get black coaches more experience interviewing? Davidson is a young guy. I'm not saying that's is absolutely why he did it, but it is a possibility.

Of course he wasn't fired. His contract was up.

That is not a fact. That interpretation of the events is not a fact simply because they were uttered by the omnipotent Collin.

Your sheer volume of posts make you a much larger target. I often get bored with the multi-quote battles between yourself and magnus, but I couldn't help but take notice of you slamming magnus because he had no "proof" but one of your contentions was based on an assumption.

For the most part I share some of your concerns about Davidson. Being the offensive coordinator of the Browns' rather inept offensive isn't exactly a feather in your cap. Regardless, we don't know that the Browns said no to him. There's no proof. It's entirely possible that the Browns low balled him, that he and Savage agreed they couldn't work together, or a million other things.

Hell, it might even be a good sign that the Browns turned him down - their past ineptitude leads me to believe they wouldn't hire the best candidate.