Published: December 30, 2013 12:01 AM EST
Updated: January 2, 2014 11:13 AM EST

John Dudley: Firing Chudzinski wasn't the answer

PITTSBURGH -- They'd better have compromising photos. Or proof he's been spying for the Russians. (Okay, dated reference.)

Outside of some unrevealed bombshell, there's no other way Browns owner Jimmy Haslam and CEO Joe Banner can justify firing Rob Chudzinski after an 111/2-month test run.

Chudzinski got to coach exactly 15 NFL games before speculation over his job security began to light up Twitter on Sunday in the moments before the Browns' season finale against the Steelers at Heinz Field.

Yes, the Browns were bad again. They lost seven straight, finished 4-12 and seemed to steadily regress after upsetting the Ravens in what proved to be their high-water mark, a 24-18 win in Week 9.

But honestly, did you expect much more? Were you thinking playoffs? Were you sold on the quarterback trio of Brandon Weeden/Jason Campbell/Brian Hoyer? Were you set with Josh Gordon and not much else at receiver?

Were you really surprised that the offense's incompetence left a talented defense with virtually no margin for error?

If you're Haslam, the man who talked about learning patience through osmosis from his time in Pittsburgh, one of the NFL's most stabile franchises, you don't pull the plug on your hand-picked guy before he marks his first New Year's Day with the team.

If you're Banner, formerly part of a slow and steady management style in Philadelphia, you don't blow up a coaching staff built under your watch before it even has the chance to get going.

But they did, unbelievably, and over protests from players like Pro Bowl tackle Joe Thomas.

"You look at great franchises," Thomas said Sunday. "They don't fire your coach after the first season. You can't do it."

Change isn't always good. But change is all the Browns have had since returning to the league.

Chudzinski seemed blindsided by reports he might not be back. Those rumors became reality when the Browns announced Sunday night that Chudzinski won't return, saying in a statement, "We needed to see progress with this football team."

Sunday's 20-7 loss to the the Steelers left the Browns 2-4 in the AFC North and 1-7 on the road and sent them into an offseason that figures to center around finding a starting quarterback and a feature running back.

Chudzinski expected to be part of that offseason, even as he acknowledged after Sunday's game that in the NFL, speculation over coaching job security "sort of comes with the territory."

Now they'll start all over again. That's progress?

Haslam and Banner can't be happy with the play of the defense, a unit that was statistically comparable to last season but broke down at critical times after the 4-5 start. Sure, that's a direct reflection on defensive coordinator Ray Horton. But if the Browns are unhappy with Horton, they could have addressed that without firing Chudzinski, too.

Haslam and Banner probably don't believe Campbell, Weeden or Hoyer is the long-term answer at quarterback. But those are the weapons they gave Chudzinski.

They probably were repulsed by the backfield committee headed by retread Willis McGahee. But they orchestrated the Trent Richardson trade.

It makes no sense to evaluate Chudzinski's body of work based on how he coached a bunch of lame ducks, especially because Haslam and Banner must realize they're not operating in a vacuum. The rest of the football world is paying attention, especially the part that lives within the tight circles that include NFL and top college coaching prospects.

The men within that circle know Chudzinski, Horton and offensive coordinator Norv Turner were the Browns' guys last spring. They understand the three were handed an untenable situation that would only improve with multiple offseasons of retooling.

By pulling the plug on Chudzinski after 352 days on the job, Haslam and Banner risk making the Browns' coaching job even more toxic than it already is. Who in his right mind would want it, outside of some guy in a Brian Sipe jersey on a barstool in Painesville?

There'd better be something we don't know about. Something really big. Something really bad. Otherwise, nothing Haslam or Banner say can adequately explain the decision to fire Chudzinski now.
