figured i'd add to the 4 or 5 Bennett threads that have popped up in the last few minutes
All other Bennett threads are imposters...check the timestamps.
Yea yea yea yea but check out what I said in my thread. https://www.pewterreport.com/Boards/index.php/topic,1313282.0.html I called it that mine was the best thread and a poster agreed with me so take that.
For a lousy 1 year deal no less! And some still wonder why Dom is gone.
That type of move is completely on the coaching staff. If you have a guy you could resign for cheap, it's up to the coaches if they feel he fits.
No the player roster is the primary responsibility of the GM. Sure the coaches provide insight but the buck stops with the GM. A team with no pass rushers let's their top sack guy walk. That can't happen.
The FO doesn't design the schemes and call the games or decide who plays. The decision to say "we don't need Bennett even though he could be had for next to nothing" was 100% on the staff.
You've got it backwards. The coaches coach the players the GM signs. Again, coaches have input but it's ultimately the GM's responsibility. If you don't understand that, I can't help you. Edit: That's why the Lovie Smith final say over personnel thing is significant.
Ok pal, I understand that but not every situation with a player is the same. The GM isn't going to blindly bring in/retain players. It is based on how they fit the team and the scheme. In the situation where you have a guy that can be retained for nothing, the coaching staff is asked, do we need this guy, does he fit what we want to do, are there guys we can replace him with, etc. Especially with a team that has shown no problem spending money.
Ok fair enough. So Schiano said to Dom - don't resign that guy who led the team in sacks last year? Because he's got T'eo and unproven Bowers on the bench? I just have a hard time believing that. Dom wanted his second round draft pick to play. Even so, still shouldve signed him for insurance. Poor judgement.
Agree to disagree. I think Schiano said to Dom that he believes that he has guys who could fill Bennett's role that were still under contract. Either way though, poor judgement definitely and neither Schiano nor Dom are here anymore.
Yea but I called it that mine was the best Bennett thread so take that.
This is the best Michael Bennett thread by far. Sure hope we learned our lesson. From now on, we should sign injured players to long-term contracts for however much they want.
For a lousy 1 year deal no less! And some still wonder why Dom is gone.
That type of move is completely on the coaching staff. If you have a guy you could resign for cheap, it's up to the coaches if they feel he fits.
No the player roster is the primary responsibility of the GM. Sure the coaches provide insight but the buck stops with the GM. A team with no pass rushers let's their top sack guy walk. That can't happen.
The FO doesn't design the schemes and call the games or decide who plays. The decision to say "we don't need Bennett even though he could be had for next to nothing" was 100% on the staff.
You've got it backwards. The coaches coach the players the GM signs. Again, coaches have input but it's ultimately the GM's responsibility. If you don't understand that, I can't help you. Edit: That's why the Lovie Smith final say over personnel thing is significant.
Ok pal, I understand that but not every situation with a player is the same. The GM isn't going to blindly bring in/retain players. It is based on how they fit the team and the scheme. In the situation where you have a guy that can be retained for nothing, the coaching staff is asked, do we need this guy, does he fit what we want to do, are there guys we can replace him with, etc. Especially with a team that has shown no problem spending money.
Ok fair enough. So Schiano said to Dom - don't resign that guy who led the team in sacks last year? Because he's got T'eo and unproven Bowers on the bench? I just have a hard time believing that. Dom wanted his second round draft pick to play. Even so, still shouldve signed him for insurance. Poor judgement.
Agree to disagree. I think Schiano said to Dom that he believes that he has guys who could fill Bennett's role that were still under contract. Either way though, poor judgement definitely and neither Schiano nor Dom are here anymore.
Maybe SR will tell us one day who made the call.
^^ If I'm wrong I hope he doesn't haha.
This one is my third favorite
For a lousy 1 year deal no less! And some still wonder why Dom is gone.
That type of move is completely on the coaching staff. If you have a guy you could resign for cheap, it's up to the coaches if they feel he fits.
No the player roster is the primary responsibility of the GM. Sure the coaches provide insight but the buck stops with the GM. A team with no pass rushers let's their top sack guy walk. That can't happen.
The FO doesn't design the schemes and call the games or decide who plays. The decision to say "we don't need Bennett even though he could be had for next to nothing" was 100% on the staff.
You've got it backwards. The coaches coach the players the GM signs. Again, coaches have input but it's ultimately the GM's responsibility. If you don't understand that, I can't help you. Edit: That's why the Lovie Smith final say over personnel thing is significant.
Who in their right mind would give pencil pusher Dom the power to decide whether a guy is kept over the guy that practices with the player every damn day?
Vote for your favorite Michael Bennett thread!
+1.This moron thought he wasn't a Buccaneer Man.
A lot of revisionist history going on in here.
Michael Bennett, George Selvie and Wallace Gilberry = 23 sacksJust saying
