By good old days of Mark Dominik are we referring to the 28-52 last 5 years?
Note that I put "good ole days" in quotes in the original post.
Lovie is picking this "GM". Glazers acted fast to keep Lovie out of Detroit so he's been given the extra power. I'm assuming Lovie will have all the say on draft picks, etc. Therefore, it doesn't matter who the "GM" is. Just my opinion.
The GM is still a crucial hire. He's going to be doing all the personnel work, with Lovie there to put the stamp of approval on draft choices and free agents. They better have someone competent, with a vision for building a team, an excellent talent evaluator, and a smart cap manager. He needs to be more than Lovie's piss-boy. He better be able to state his opinions with authority and to be persuasive. To say the GM doesn't matter is nonsensical. If it doesn't matter who the GM is, then the new organization is operating under a dysfunctional structure from the start.
Now that there's another team searching for a GM, time does become a concern. Would hate to lose out on a GM to the Dolphins... and guess what, the Dolphins job probably will have full control over personnel. The Bucs GM position does not. And reports are confirming that Ballard is out because of the issue of final say, whether it was KC refusing to allow him to interview or Ballard refusing on his own. Nice job Glazers. As usual, you have proven yourselves to be worthless.
I think the Glazers are taking the time concerns seriously. I think the Ballard reports were ultimately incorrect - it apparently had to do more with him not wanting to move his family (they just got to KC a year ago). For all the concerns about the quality of candidates, I haven't seen a single guy mentioned - save Alonzo Highsmith (and he is just "on the radar") who sounds unqualified. Ross was up for some GM jobs last year and comes from a well-respected group, and every NFL-type I've seen seems to love Vital. Dawson also regarded highly by scouting community.
The Glazers have handcuffed the GM position, and I have no faith that they're going to pick the right guy. They're f**king idiots. Ballard sounded good and might've been a good guy to pair up with Lovie.
Didn't Ballard say he didn't want the job because of family? wasn't it reported that the Chiefs did not block the interview?
Yes, that report came out after this statement. However, I don't believe for a second that if this GM job had full personnel authority that Ballard would've passed up the opportunity.
Now that there's another team searching for a GM, time does become a concern. Would hate to lose out on a GM to the Dolphins... and guess what, the Dolphins job probably will have full control over personnel. The Bucs GM position does not. And reports are confirming that Ballard is out because of the issue of final say, whether it was KC refusing to allow him to interview or Ballard refusing on his own. Nice job Glazers. As usual, you have proven yourselves to be worthless.
I think the Glazers are taking the time concerns seriously. I think the Ballard reports were ultimately incorrect - it apparently had to do more with him not wanting to move his family (they just got to KC a year ago). For all the concerns about the quality of candidates, I haven't seen a single guy mentioned - save Alonzo Highsmith (and he is just "on the radar") who sounds unqualified. Ross was up for some GM jobs last year and comes from a well-respected group, and every NFL-type I've seen seems to love Vital. Dawson also regarded highly by scouting community.
I agree with BucNW - the lack of full control is likely the major factor (much like it seems to me that Josh McDaniels withdrew his name from the Browns to avoid that circus). If I'm Ballard and my name is coming up for GM jobs, why uproot myself to be a GM in name only? In the last 5 or 6 years, have you seen any team really bring in an "unqualified" candidate? Maybe I just can't think of any, but in at least the last 5 years teams are interviewing "assistant" GMs.
Don't get in the way of a good hate-on Vin. If someone can't bich about the coach, and there is no GM at the moment, they will bich about the owners and the obviously awful soon-t-be-named GM.
I'm ordinarily not someone who invests time in complaining about a coach or GM. I'm optimistic about Lovie. I'm glad we got him, and I understand that he got the personnel authority because the Glazers were desperate and Lovie had leverage. At the same time, I think a strong GM with full authority over personnel and coaching hires is a better organizational structure. And, as I've said numerous times, I think the Glazers are idiots and are not even remotely qualified to be making decisions about football matters. That is my chief beef.Whenever the new GM is hired, I will be on board. I'm sure I'll find reasons to be optimistic.
Sweep; +1
I am really more concerned about the scouts. Is Hickey going to survive another regime change?
I am really more concerned about the scouts. Is Hickey going to survive another regime change?
He'll be gone after the draft.
I am really more concerned about the scouts. Is Hickey going to survive another regime change?
He'll be gone after the draft.
Is that how it would happen, the front office (scoutsetc) last through the draft? sounds right I guess
I am really more concerned about the scouts. Is Hickey going to survive another regime change?
He'll be gone after the draft.
Is that how it would happen, the front office (scoutsetc) last through the draft? sounds right I guess
Usually new GMs don't dismiss the personnel people immediately since they've already put so much time into evaluations and prep throughout the year. The draft planning is an extension of that. I think it would be very tough to pick up with new staff in the months leading up to the draft, using the previous staff's information and methodologies. There needs to be some continuity with the accumulated knowledge and the ongoing evaluations, interviews, etc... at the Senior Bowl, combine, and campus workouts... Once the draft is over, the new evaluation year begins for scouts and front office personnel, which makes it the right time to bring in new people. I don't think Hickey survives. Stokes and Quarles probably do, with one of them perhaps getting the bump to Hickey's current job. Just guessing based on positive impressions I have of Stokes and Quarles.
That's right - also, their contracts typically run through the draft, not the calendar year.
thanks for the info guys
SR talking about this right now - changes most likely happening after the draft.
fyi, someone on the red board posted (via Adam Caplan, NFL.com) that Lovie's final say is on 53-man, not draft.
