Jason Cole ?@JasonPhilCole 10m Based on what I'm hearing, it's unlikely #Bucs will be able to hire #Chiefs personnel man Chris Ballard since Lovie Smith has final say.Cause for concern or nah?
It should cause concern...
Yeah I guess it could be a little problem because teams generally don't let executives out of their existing contracts unless another team gives them a promotion entailing final say.
This is the first issue that came to mind upon learning that Lovie has final say on personnel.Love the Lovie hiring and the staff he has put together so far, but this could be a potential big issue. Mainly when it comes to hiring a good GM.
No.Ballard can be obstinant. and sometimes will come off as an assbag.Lovie is going to focus on coaching the 61 and has final say on those aspects.IMO - All the other stuff will be 'married' to the GM/Personnel man.
I don't think this is a concern at all. What's wrong with the idea of having a cohesive personnel group? We've obviously put all our eggs in the Lovie basket, let's make it work for him.
I don't think this is a concern at all. What's wrong with the idea of having a cohesive personnel group? We've obviously put all our eggs in the Lovie basket, let's make it work for him.
The grisly history of the guy making dinner shopping for groceries should be the concern.
I would rather we go after a guy who will be fine with the terms that come with the job. If final say is a big issue I dont want the guy.
I would rather we go after a guy who will be fine with the terms that come with the job. If final say is a big issue I dont want the guy.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the issue.The issue is that we might miss out on the best candidates out there because of Lovies "final say."If it is an issue like it's looking like it might, then we may have to settle on a guy. Not what I really want happening when it comes to our new GM.
Apparently he wants to stay in KC at a lower level position and a lower level pay grade and still not have the "final say". Not sure that kind of strategic thinking is something teams look for in a GM.
I would rather we go after a guy who will be fine with the terms that come with the job. If final say is a big issue I dont want the guy.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the issue.The issue is that we might miss out on the best candidates out there because of Lovies "final say."If it is an issue like it's looking like it might, then we may have to settle on a guy. Not what I really want happening when it comes to our new GM.
Exactly. The norm around the league is you only let a personnel guy out of his contract with you is if another team is going to give him final say. If you don't have final say, all other front office jobs are seen as fairly equal, so you'd just be letting go of someone you like and who does a good job for you just to be nice and help another team out without really letting your guy advance his career.
Apparently he wants to stay in KC at a lower level position and a lower level pay grade and still not have the "final say". Not sure that kind of strategic thinking is something teams look for in a GM.
Well apparently his future is a bright one. There's nothing wrong with waiting for the right opportunity.GMs typically have final say and like/want it that way. Can't blame him for waiting.
Lovie worked with this guy for a decade, allegedly would like someone else as GM, and you guys think it's a big deal or cause for concern? People just want to invent issues
The issue is that we might miss out on the best candidates out there because of Lovies "final say."
But are candidates who would chafe at Lovie having final say really be the best candidates? The last thing we want is to bring in a GM who'd cause a power struggle.
I would rather we go after a guy who will be fine with the terms that come with the job. If final say is a big issue I dont want the guy.
Yes, of course, but that isn't the issue.The issue is that we might miss out on the best candidates out there because of Lovies "final say."If it is an issue like it's looking like it might, then we may have to settle on a guy. Not what I really want happening when it comes to our new GM.
Who's to say Ballard was the best candidate for what we needed? He hasnt been a GM before. And obviously him not having the last word is an issue. We need someone who understands where the final decision comes from.
