A week ago, Morris wrote a
column essentially questioning Randy Lerner’s commitment to Cleveland
and the Browns given the sad state of affairs in Berea. This isn’t
exactly a new thought, (see our article here) but it was somewhat refreshing to
see that, finally, someone at the Plain Dealer was raising the question.
Of course it may have been too much to ask that this question be raised
on the sports pages of the PD but at least the issue found its way in
print in Cleveland.
What Morris’ initial column lacked in insight it more than made
up for in passion, something usually in short supply at the Plain Dealer.
Morris spoke not as a sportwriter but more as a fan who is sick of losing
and sees an unemotional owner in Lerner who is seemingly more interested
in investing in European soccer than in the Browns. Morris didn’t
exactly make a compelling case though by suggesting, for example, that
Lerner demonstrate his commitment by spending more. Next time Morris
may want to vet his thinking process a bit further with someone a bit
more knowledgeable because the issue isn’t the lack of spending by
the Browns, given the NFL’s salary cap, it’s the lack of ability
to spend their dollars wisely. Still, the overarching question
is fair.
Because Morris’ musings appeared
on the editorial pages we figured it would be mostly ignored, given
the rather low regard, generally, that the PD’s editorial pages are
held by most folks. And it was, except by the Browns. Showing that
an incredibly thin skin exists within the management and ownership ranks
of the Browns, Bonsiewiecz, utilizing his official title, wrote a rather
terse letter to the editor last Saturday.
In it, he gripes that if Morris thinks Lerner is a lousy owner, he should
just say so rather than dance around it. He also takes Morris
to task for not understanding the rudimentary workings of the NFL and
its salary cap and says that Lerner is committed to the Browns because
look at how low he’s kept the ticket prices. Finally, in the kind
of vague reference he criticized Morris for making in the first place,
Bonsiewiecz concluded by asking, “Want a new owner? Be careful what
you wish for.”
And Bonseiwiecz wonders why
anyone would question Lerner’s loyalty? Maybe it’s because the
only time Lerner talks publicly, it’s under very controlled circumstances,
such as with the Browns flagship radio station where he won’t be forced
to answer anything more difficult than what he had for breakfast. Maybe
it’s because it’s insulting to suggest that the reason the Browns
ticket prices are so low is because Lerner is a swell guy and not because
even Lerner isn’t so naïve as to risk alienating the fan base for
good by asking people to pay more for a product whose quality continues
to deteriorate. And maybe, just maybe, it’s because Lerner employs
publicists who can’t edit their own thoughts or letters and instead
of easing the situation, which they’re paid to do, fuel the fire by
writing letters in their official capacity that impliedly threaten that
if fans and writers continue to hurt Lerner’s feelings he may run
to England permanently and sell this franchise to David Modell.
If Bonsiewiecz thought that
his rather childish response would put an end to it, he’s as clueless
as Kimberly Ethridge, the now former publicist of Tyrell Owens who disputed
reports of a T.O. suicide attempt by saying he had “25 million reasons
why he should be alive.” That’s because Morris revisited this issue in this morning’s Plain
Dealer if only to detail the bizarre response from Bonsiewiecz in Saturday’s
paper as well as Morris’ even longer, more bizarre letter to Morris
personally.
This would be a better fight
if Morris was more up to the task. While he rightly notes that
Bonsiewiecz introduced a question that had never been raised, he essentially
revisits his original point in a typically clumsy manner, concluding
that the problem with Lerner is that he just doesn’t get mad enough
and that he should threaten to show the door to anyone satisfied with
losing.
Well, that’s a plan, but
hardly the best plan. We doubt that the problem with this management
and this owner is that they are happy about losing, particularly in
such spectacular fashion. The problem of course is much more complex
but has its roots, clearly, in a constant lack of leadership.
In some ways, this reminds
us of the debate currently raging over whether Marty Schottenheimer
should be fired by San Diego. On one side of the debate are those
who rightly point out that he didn’t personally commit the turnovers
or fail to make the plays that caused his teams to consistently lose
in the playoffs. On the other side are those who rightly point
out that whatever the problem, he’s never been able to get the job
done. The man does have a track record.
The same is true with Lerner.
As Bonsiewiecz points out, it’s not as if Lerner can strap on the
pads himself and play a few downs to solve the problem. But acting
as if Lerner is not a significant part of the problem ignores the fact
that the only constant since the Browns returned is that they’ve been
owned by the Lerners. Ultimately the task falls now to Randy Lerner
to figure out why the Browns continue to be a laughing stock and it
is perfectly legitimate for anyone to question whether Lerner’s interest
in English soccer has diverted much needed attention away from these
important issues.
Frankly, the fact that Bonsiewiecz
and Lerner are so sensitive to criticism that they would publish a veiled
threat in such a cowardly fashion should be enough to scare even the
most casual fan. It not only demonstrates that neither “gets
it” when it comes to understanding the rights, privileges and obligations
of owning a professional sports franchise like the Browns, it also demonstrates
an amazing lack of sensitivity toward a fan based rubbed raw by an endless
stream of pathetic performances.