The Browns’ decision to hire Todd Monken surprised many around the NFL, but very few in Cleveland. The former Ravens offensive coordinator was the “strong No. 1 choice” of the team’s entire search committee, including general manager Andrew Berry, per Cleveland.com’s Mary Kay Cabot.
Monken, 59, beat out Nate Scheelhaase and Jim Schwartz for the job. Scheelhaase, the 35-year-old Rams’ passing game coordinator, is viewed as a future head coach around the league, including by the Browns. Schwartz has been the Browns’ defensive coordinator since 2023 and is currently trying to force his way out of Cleveland after being passed over for the head coaching gig.
The trio of finalist was determined by the Browns’ unorthodox hiring process that prioritized coaches’ resumes and reviews from former players and colleagues over their interviews, according to Sports Illustrated’s Albert Breer. Monken has a strong history with younger players dating back to an impressive stint as the head coach at Southern Miss, and his references included Jameis Winston, one of his quarterbacks in Tampa Bay; Kirby Smart, his head coach at Georgia; and Ozzie Newsome, the Ravens’ longtime front office executive.
That information, obtained early in the hiring process, kept Monken in the running even as younger candidates with hotter names interviewed for the job. Kevin Stefanski emerged as an early favorite in 2020 for similar reasons.
These reports could be interpreted as spin from the Browns after criticism of their coaching search, which featured several candidates who withdrew from consideration. Their decision to tap Monken over Scheelhaase is understandable, given his relative youth and inexperience, but opting not to promote Schwartz could cost them a coach they had been planning to keep all along.
Only time will tell if the Browns’ out-of-the-box approach to finding their new head coach will yield better results than more standard hiring practices. Monken has a tough task in front of him – Cleveland has won just eight games in the last two years – but the team seems confident that he can get the most out of their young roster.
They just keep twisting the knife in Schwartz.
Totally dysfunctional organization!
Excuse me? So hire your defensive guy to run the team because why? Schwartz was a horrible HC in Detroit so reward him and let him do it again? The Browns have a very young offense and QB….sure let’s NOT hire the guy with 39 years and solid offensive resume….and promote the crabby DC …. gotta it! THAT would be dysfunctional….
I don’t think he was horrible. Took the first 0-16 team to the playoffs in 3 years. It might have happened sooner (maybe?) if Stafford had not been injured in Schwartz’s 2nd year. He did fall off after that playoff year. Outstanding? No. Horrible? No, as well.
What are they supposed to say at this point? “Yeah, well, we had to settle for our fifth or sixth choice…”
Monken was their top choice and for good reason…Schwartz was a horrible HC in Detroit…. he should feel honored that he was even CONSIDERED for the HC job…
Jim Schwartz is NOT an offensive coach and wouldn’t have a CLUE how to develop a young QB, let alone offense.. Todd Monken has a very solid resume….how is it so difficult to believe Schwartz was passed over 🤔
Very Solid Resume? as a HC 13-26 college record .333. that’s it. they hired some old school, past his prime coach because that’s all they could get at this point.
My only issue with Monken is that he’s been a coach for nearly 40 years and has never been a HC in the NFL. That makes him “not a retread” but also makes him a guy that, up until now, despite his offensive acumen, 32 teams did not believe he was HC material. Suddenly, he is?
I posted below why I do understand the decision.
(I am aware he HC for mid-level college team and did a decent job with them. But even there, he did not get a HC job at a “bigger” program: he came back to the NFL as an OC).
Tracenv: “The Browns can do no wrong!”
Never said they could do no wrong……
Got fired for being a terrible OC. Great fit 😂
He wasn’t fired …
My wife was my strong number one choice after I learned that Jessica Biel was not interested in me.
I wanted Schwartz. He would have instilled more toughness and accountability. However, the Browns’ single biggest need is to “fix the offense”, with rebuilding the O line and mentoring a young QB as important pieces of that effort.
They were not going to get an experienced OC with the chops and credibility to do that.
So, I understand the decision. What I do not understand is the major disconnect with Schwartz. Why interview him for the 2nd time if they realized they needed a HC with serious offensive background? What message was not sent or not received that led Schwartz to believe he was “the guy”? Sure, some of that is on Schwartz, but the 2nd interview had to send a strong positive message to Schwartz.
Why does nearly Browns’ decision end up as FUBAR?
It’s the Browns, so I’m going to automatically say it was a bad choice, until proven otherwise