|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,842 |
Quote:
Then talked to Pioli and simply put, Pioli didn't want Mangini..
Daman...first, your assuming Pioli didn't want to work with Mangini.
If Pioli was not willing to work with Mangini, I ask the question, WHY?
Did Pioli believe Mangini was not a good choice to help the Browns achieve their goals?
Did Pioli believe Mangini was not qualified to be the Browns HC?
OR, did Pioli have a personal grudge against Mangini, an emotional issue that would not allow Pioli to do what was best for the Browns?
I would say that Pioli has a flaw in his makeup if he was not willing to do what was best for the Browns. I'm glad he got his job in KC and I'm glad the Browns have Mangini and are closing in on a GM.
As the Browns learned from Crennel/Savage...is very important that the GM and HC work well with each other.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177 |
Quote:
Maybe Pioli thinks the KC owner is a weak pushover and he will be able to run rough-shod over him (if a man can't fire his head coach, how is he going to be able to stand up to the GM/Head of Operations?)
Or maybe the Hunt's are just smart enough to realize they need help in selecting the HC.
Everyone is all upset about giving Pioli control, yet we've given control to EM. Who is Randy gonna take, Kok or EM? When it comes down to it, EM is the boss here. IT's gonna like, gosh, Bill and Scott in NE. 
Hhhhhmmmm.....
Randy is gonna exahust all efforts to bring NE to C-Town, Kraft is a good freind, we are gonna try and copy cat them even more to a T this time than in 2004.
Pioli wasnt on board with that, thats why he aint here, not some rash conspiracy. He got the GM job, a true GM job, in KC. He woulda just been the HC's puppet here, and the HC of Randys choosing not his.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
Quote:
I'm not missing the whole point, you are. I get what you're saying but it's on a faulty assumption. Pioli is a three time Executive of the Year, who was one of the two most important figures in building a 3 time Super Bowl winner and last year's 16-0 team. For those who say that Pioli wasn't important to the Patriots, read the words of Bill Belichick
We read his words about RAC too. We've seen his diciples fail MANY times!
Accept for Mangini who had two out of three winning seasons WITHOUT Bellichick. The proof is in the pudding. Pioli doesn't have any pudding as proof. Just speculation and conjecture. Just like RAC did.
And who do they bestow "exucutive of the years to"? Successfull teams. Which doesn't mean that executive was actually responsible for their success.
IMO- Bellichick simply told Pioli what groceries to buy. Who will be providing that list for him now? Kirk Ferentz? Yet another rookie HC?
Good luck with that..................
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Aren't you glad he isn't running things in Berea? Yeah, we should have went with an all rookie line up. It's proven to be SO successfull here!
Again Pit, calling Pioli a rookie would be like calling Ichiro a rookie. It may be technically true but if you think that means he's not more qualified for the job than others, then you're bonkers. He pretty much did the GM job in New England, except that he had Belichick to report to. The guy we're bringing in hasn't even sniffed it. Big difference.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
IMO- Bellichick simply told Pioli what groceries to buy.
Oh I forgot, the ultimate opinion on New England football doesn't Bob Kraft, Bill Belichick or Scott Pioli, it comes from PitDawg. I'll be sure to remember that whenever I talk about New England in the future. 
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Quote:
Again Pit, calling Pioli a rookie would be like calling Ichiro a rookie.
Wiki: Ichiro Suzuki
Aided by Major League Baseball's decision to allow All-Star voting in Japan, Ichiro was the first rookie to lead all players in voting for the All-Star Game. At season's end, he won the American League Most Valuable Player and the Rookie of the Year awards, becoming only the second player in MLB history (after Fred Lynn) to receive both honors in the same season.
Notice the bold? 
Using your scenario your agreeing with Pit and I doubt that is your mission. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Notice the bold?
Using your scenario your agreeing with Pit and I doubt that is your mission.
I'm hereby convinced that people on this board stop reading posts after a sentence they disagree with and try to shoot people down. Will you read the whole post PLEASE? I said it was technically true. He was a rookie here but was a star in Japan beforehand, thus making the learning curve nil and hence, the analogy. Sheesh.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Sorry it is hard to continue reading when you blatently start off with misleading comments. Don't blame me for leading me down that road, I can't take someone seriously when they start off with inane statements. Either way why use a bad inallegy (sp) to begin with? Carry on! Sheesh, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
I'm sorry that you couldn't give me the courtesy of reading the following sentence to try to take the first even remotely in context.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Tell me something..and stay on topic..when you saw that Ernie Accorsi advised Lerner what to do..why do you dismiss it and keep wailing about it?
Now are you going to somehow spin that Bellyache and Pioli have a better business (football )mind than Accorsi?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Tell me something..and stay on topic..when you saw that Ernie Accorsi advised Lerner what to do..why do you dismiss it and keep wailing about it?
Now are you going to somehow spin that Bellyache and Pioli have a better business (football )mind than Accorsi?
I don't dismiss it at all. I think it's incredibly bright to ask people with more knowledge than you who they recommend, nor do I question Accorsi's recommendation. All I'm saying is that even if you're getting a recommendation from Ernie Accorsi, it's still a good idea to explore all your options when you're dealing with someone so raw, especially with a guy like Kokinis who will have to be handcuffed to McCreight because he's not versed in the college draft. My point with Pioli is that he's not nearly as raw and thus, I don't think he needs the same kind of vetting process
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Wow, first, I was comparing your rant on Lerner about hiring Mangini without proper "vetting" in your view and you are raving about Pioli to KC with less "vetting" than Lerner did.
It's funny that you compare Pioli going to GM to Suzuki going to the MLB. You see, Suzuki may have played against lesser talent, but it's not like they had him do part of the job, but not all You can proclaim Pioli as proven all you want, but the simple fact is that he has never done anything more than be director of pro personnel. He has never had full authority and he CERTAINLY never had the final word. You dismissed a very important tidbit in your glowing love of Pioli.......Belechick was always there to make the final call. There is absolutley no guarantee that Pioli will have anywhere near a successful run in KC, let alone do what he was a PART of in N.E.
You can dismiss having full control all you want, but Pioli has never had it and is in every aspect of being THE person in control, a pure rookie, just as Coke is. The difference is Pioli watned full control and Lerner wasn't going to give that to ANY rookie. Smart move by Lerner.
Oh, and as you said....I'l take Ernie Accorsi's evaluation over yours, Bellys', Krafts', or anyone else you mentioned. Accorsit's track record on building multiple franchises, his success in advising other owners on solid execs, and his actual knowledge of what went down with Lerner is far more educated than you eye, and even the NE organization. If he advised Lerner to pass on Pioli, there's a valid reason. Enough said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 180
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 180 |
Quote:
Or maybe the Hunt's are just smart enough to realize they need help in selecting the HC.
That's pretty obvious. They are not even smart enough to know how to fire the one they got.
Quote:
When it comes down to it, EM is the boss here. IT's gonna like, gosh, Bill and Scott in NE.... Randy is gonna exahust all efforts to bring NE to C-Town, Kraft is a good freind, we are gonna try and copy cat them even more to a T this time than in 2004.
EM has burned his bridges with NE years ago. If Lerner relied on the Kraft's recommendation, does this mean Robert gave a thumbs-up on Mangini? If Lerner really wanted to copy NE, he would have signed Pioli on Day 1. Hiring Mangini is the last thing Lerner would do if he wanted to emulate the Patriots.
Quote:
Pioli wasnt on board with that, thats why he aint here, not some rash conspiracy. He got the GM job, a true GM job, in KC. He woulda just been the HC's puppet here, and the HC of Randys choosing not his.
That's mixed up... Who is talking about a conspiracy?
Look, Lerner made the decision about hiring one man to lead the football team to win the Super Bowl. In this scenario, it came down to a choice between Pioli and Mangini. (He might have entertained the idea of combining them, but we know it did not go anywhere). Lerner selected Mangini as HC to lead the team, instead of Pioli as "Head of Operations" to lead the team. It's pretty simple.
Sure, I am speculating that Pioli not only wanted full control, but unquestioned authority in making decisions. This is not new. Many people pondered this idea weeks ago while we heard about Pioli's "demands", and I find it ironic that Pioli ended up selecting an owner that currently appears weak.
And I don't care how unintelligent the boss is - if he chooses not to question his subordinate's decisions, he is a flat-out idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
So what if Coke is teamed with McCreight?
One does the FA signings and one does the college draft with Mangini..
I don't see any structural problem with that..in fact it's more minds that can see what the needs are.
Are you denying or willing to dismiss the fact if Pioli was wanting his choice of coaches it wasn't going to be one who is experienced?
Now walk me through that..tell me how a inexperienced coach was going to come in and turn this team around.
I said right after Rac was canned I wanted no rookie HC.
I maintain that..I wanted a guy who knows what it takes to assemble a staff,take control of his players and be able to know what he needs and get the GM to get him those things..
These players we have now need a old school coach..that locker room needs a hammer thrown down in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Oh, and as you said....I'l take Ernie Accorsi's evaluation over yours, Bellys', Krafts', or anyone else you mentioned. Accorsit's track record on building multiple franchises, his success in advising other owners on solid execs, and his actual knowledge of what went down with Lerner is far more educated than you eye, and even the NE organization. If he advised Lerner to pass on Pioli, there's a valid reason. Enough said.
Do you really think he advised Lerner against Pioli given that he was the first guy Lerner interviewed, or do you think he was one of the recommendations given (maybe even the top recommendation) and Lerner, knowing that choosing his own head coach would eliminate Pioli, chose Mangini over him anyway?
Anyway, since you're so obsessed with Accorsi's opinion in this, here's a quote he gave about Pioli from 2005, before he retired...
Quote:
"He has to be one of the leading contenders for any GM job," Accorsi said. "He knows talent. He knows what makes teams successful. He's already a top executive. I don't know of an ingredient the job requires that he doesn't have. And what I love about him is he's always trying to learn, always trying to get better. He doesn't act like he has all the answers.
Enough said.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
When is the tantrum and berating of Lerner's decison going to end with you?
FACT: We've had "three rookie HC's". It hasn't worked.
FACT: We need a guy who's proven he instills dicipline and has proven he can prepare a team.
FACT: NOBODY in the FO is on the sidelines or prepares a team for games, are in practices, runs traing camps or mini-camps.
So why not just deal with it and quit beating down our new HC and the way this is being done before you have ANY results to base it on?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
So, it's "obsessed" to listen to a guy that hsa built mutliple franchises and aided others in successfullly putting execs in place to succeed over someone on a messageboard that doesn't have the full story? Mmmmm, OK.
Yes, Accorsi DID advise Lerner that to go with Mangini over Pioli. He felt, as the research bore out that was done, that an experienced and successful HC was more important than hiring an INEXPERIENCED first time GM.
Again, who would you rather have in charge of hiring a HC....someone that's NEVER hired a coach in his entire career and bent on going against the advice of a successful executive, or an executive the's PROVEN with MULTIPE franchises to be able to make the right decision on personnel? I understand that you fel in love with Pioli and think he's God's gift to footbal without ever having made a decision at that level before in his career. I prefer to trust someone that HAS done it on more than one occasion and did it succssfully.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449 |
Quote:
So you're comfortable with a first-time GM and a rookie head coach?
I know I'm 3 pages late at responding here, but...Yes I would be comfy with that.
There in no way to know if Spags could transition from DC to HC, but I think he could. Thats my opinion, and the only way that could be proved is if it happens and we're looking back and talking 2 years down the road.
I don't look at Pioli as being a rookie. He did not have the job title of GM while in NE, but nobody had that title. It was a job responsibility of both BB and SP. They worked together good and that is the primary reason NE has been so successful. Whoever Pioli brings in I will be happy with, as long as they are both on the same page and results are satisfying.
Spags is looking less likely at the moment. I seen earlier that the Giants may make Spags the HC in waiting.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/footba...or_steve_s.html
I would love for Shanahan to become the next HC, but I don't think that is realistic. Shanahan wants more power than he'd have as just the HC, but I've also heard he'd like to stay in the AFC West. So maybe that is a possibility.
If the Chiefs had not landed Pioli I really was hoping DeCosta would be the next guy on the phone.
Last edited by ChiefsFan; 01/14/09 02:59 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Yes, Accorsi DID advise Lerner that to go with Mangini over Pioli
Source?
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Yes, I have a source. I don't have a link, but I have a source.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
Quote:
Yes, I have a source. I don't have a link, but I have a source.
And whoever your "source" is, he has proven to be far more accurate than any poster on this board by far. Including Spectre.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177 |
These two broad and totally false generalizations being thrown around are quite amusing.
1. Must have a HC w/ exprience. Randy agrees, nothing wrong with that, BUT, you have to explore your options. That didnt happen here, Randy made yet another rash decision. Even if EM is your man, interveiw everyone possible.
It's not as automatic as so many aroudn here think. Just cuz you were a HC before doesnt mean you necessaryily know more than an assistant.
2. The pervious organization structure was wrong....outside of the Pats all the all other teams have won super bowls with Pre/GM/Coach.
The 2004 structure wasnt wrong, we just had a nutty VP, an egotisical GM, and lame brain HC. The people were wrong, not the way it was done.
Somebody has to be in charge outside of the owner, rarely does it work when its the HC.
Thats why I wanted Pioli, long term stability, which comes through a stong front office.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
If Spectre didn't have such a man crush on Pioli and didn't use tunnel vision, he wouldn't NEED a source. He said he could "read between the lines" on issues in another thread about hiring Coke, yet he can't see the obvious staring him in the face. Forget that the people I talk to have been proven reliable and don't even look at that. Just look at the situation. Accorsi and Lerner are close friends. It's been WIDELY reported that Accorsi advised Lerner throughout the process. Lerner made his moves. Do you really think that Lerner, the businessman he is, is going to spend hours upon hours with Accorsi, gather all the research that was done and gone over with Accorsi, and then just dump it all on a whim and not listen to a word that a man of Accoris's experience and success had to say? It's pretty far fetched......almost to the point of being ludicrous. I'll post more later, they're coming in to take the IV out so I have to go for a bit. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
We've done what you suggested THREE times already. Now go look at history and think about it for a minute.
Why do the same thing that's failed three times a fourth time?
I just don't get such logic.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
You need to do something..watch what happens..quit going back and forth..AND WATCH..thats what I said I was going to do.
None of us know what will happen..and even out in KC they don't know whats gonna happen..I'll be watching them as well...once FA and the draft comes ..we'll get a read on the abilities of the new guys..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
j/c
Spectre...Kokinis is going to be "handcuffed to McCreight?"
a) Kokinis got McCreight into the National Football League in the first place. Something tells me that McCreight and Kokinis will be on the same page on a lot of things.
b) By all reports, McCreight is a wunderkind similar to Savage...so why did Savage's personnel decisions appear questionable? Well, lack of chemistry between him and Romeo, for one, and Savage's general lack of familiarity with pro personnel (DESPITE his Baltimore title...ask yourself, if Savage was most comfortable on the road scouting college players in his GM job here, don't you think it was the same way in Baltimore?) hurt him not only in free agency but in the draft as well. Savage was only RESPONSIBLE for the scouting eye on the Baltimore players drafted, he never ACTUALLY DRAFTED the players...Ozzie did. Something tells me McCreight is in this similar mold, but Kokinis should have the familiarity with the pro game to pull the right levers...at least I hope.
c) Once again, Pioli has only provided the information, he's never actually pulled the levers like Belichick has. That said, I think he has more responsibility with Belichick than Savage had in Baltimore and is more prepared to tackle such a job. I think the Chiefs made a great hire and the results will take effect immediately in one of the WEAKEST divisions in football.
But I'm going to trust we made the right decisions here, especially if Accorsi has been as involved in the process as we've been told. (I wonder why it hasn't been reported in the media, only strongly hinted at for those of us who know how to draw conclusions?)
EDIT: and this does NOT mean I'm thrilled with what's going on. I have reservations all over the place. I'm just saying the process we're going with makes sense. We're hiring a coach with coaching experience who is on the same page with his prospective GM: a guy with experience in pro personnel (something Savage lacked), and this prospective GM has a good working relationship with our college guy, McCreight).
This system has all the workings of good, functional chemistry, I just hope to God the execution of this plan works!
Last edited by Ammo; 01/14/09 03:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449 |
Quote:
These two broad and totally false generalizations being thrown around are quite amusing.
1. Must have a HC w/ exprience. Randy agrees, nothing wrong with that, BUT, you have to explore your options. That didnt happen here, Randy made yet another rash decision. Even if EM is your man, interveiw everyone possible.
It's not as automatic as so many aroudn here think. Just cuz you were a HC before doesnt mean you necessaryily know more than an assistant.
2. The pervious organization structure was wrong....outside of the Pats all the all other teams have won super bowls with Pre/GM/Coach.
The 2004 structure wasnt wrong, we just had a nutty VP, an egotisical GM, and lame brain HC. The people were wrong, not the way it was done.
Somebody has to be in charge outside of the owner, rarely does it work when its the HC.
Thats why I wanted Pioli, long term stability, which comes through a stong front office.
And this is exactly what I hope the Chiefs can get out of Pioli. As a Chiefs fan, I've witnessed one of the longest tenures for any GM/Pres/CEO in the NFL and it was all the title of one man. Finally change has happened in the culture of Kansas City, and I'm excited. Now, I'm trying to keep a level head because the Chiefs still have a very long road ahead, but it appears to be going in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
He said he could "read between the lines" on issues in another thread about hiring Coke, yet he can't see the obvious staring him in the face.
Was I wrong about that? One interview with Kokinis down, one to go and none in between... seems about exactly what I said. I already said that I'm aware Accorsi had input in this process because Accorsi's candidates last year in the Falcons search are the exact same ones that showed up early on here - Kokinis and Heckert. All I'm asserting about Pioli in this thread is that he had a valuable part in the Patriots and that he's more qualified than Kokinis. I don't see why you are taking such huge issue with that other than some inherent desire you have to argue.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
Hey, I was one that was VERY skeptical of your source for quite some time. And I'm not one that is easily convinced. But through proof, I have zero reasons to question it at this point.
Your source goes along with what I consider to be sound logic. And yes, I'm quite sure Accorsi gave Lerner the green light on hiring an experienced HC as the best method and that Mangini would be the best available option.
The fact is, hiring Pioli may have been Accorsi's advice under "different circumstances". But each teams situation is different,
In our case, it's a total lack of dicipline and preparidness. Which only a HC can correct. Now if we had a franchise like Pittsburgh or San Diego, Accorsi's advice may have varied.
But varying circumstances often dictate which approach is best to correct such circumstances. And in our case, I think the correct approach is being used.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449 |
Quote:
We've done what you suggested THREE times already. Now go look at history and think about it for a minute.
Why do the same thing that's failed three times a fourth time?
I just don't get such logic.
I don't understand this logic.
If you draft a QB and he busts, than draft another and he busts, than draft another and he busts...should you stop drafting QBs?
No, you try again until you get it right. Just because the system failed 3 times don't mean the system is wrong. Maybe the right people are not in the right positions to make the system work. It is not so white and black as "we did this 3 times to no avail".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Spectre...Kokinis is going to be "handcuffed to McCreight?"
They have a similar background except that one is versed in pro personnel and the other in the college draft and scouting. Do you really think that Lerner is bringing Kokinis in here without knowing ahead of time that McCreight is still going to be with the organization to fill in his flaws. They fit well together but apart, they both have deficiencies. I'd be incredibly surprised if Randy didn't ask that in the first interview and say that he preferred that setup, even though Kokinis would clearly be above him.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
Quote:
Spectre...Kokinis is going to be "handcuffed to McCreight?"
They have a similar background except that one is versed in pro personnel and the other in the college draft and scouting. Do you really think that Lerner is bringing Kokinis in here without knowing ahead of time that McCreight is still going to be with the organization to fill in his flaws. They fit well together but apart, they both have deficiencies. I'd be incredibly surprised if Randy didn't ask that in the first interview and say that he preferred that setup.
Ok, so the correct term is "partnered with."
I'm getting into language here, when I think of "handcuffed" I think of the way Rob Ryan was only allowed to run certain types of defenses cuz Al Davis limited him.
Or Lerner handcuffed Savage to Romeo despite no prior working relationship.
I like to think two guys who complement each other by covering for each other's strengths and weaknesses and have a good working relationship and being "a great pairing" more than "handcuffed." 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
If you draft a QB and he busts, than draft another and he busts, than draft another and he busts...should you stop drafting QBs?
If there is a FA QB available who has shown some success at this level and you can get him for the same price.. why take a chance on another unproven draft pick?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Ok, so the correct term is "partnered with."
I'm getting into language here, when I think of "handcuffed" I think of the way Rob Ryan was only allowed to run certain types of defenses cuz Al Davis limited him.
Or Lerner handcuffed Savage to Romeo despite no prior working relationship.
I like to think two guys who complement each other by covering for each other's strengths and weaknesses and have a good working relationship and being "a great pairing" more than "handcuffed."
Yeah, that's why I explained it out... so much easier than trying to have words interpreted. They have a complementary set of skills. The fact that McCreight is running our scouting team while our GM position is vacant should tell you that Randy thinks he's capable, as is the fact that he was interviewed. While I think either of these two guys is too raw to GM by themselves without the bumps and bruises of being a first-time GM, but having Kokinis at GM and McCreight at a lesser position should help immensely with what has been said to be a staggering learning curve.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449 |
Quote:
Quote:
If you draft a QB and he busts, than draft another and he busts, than draft another and he busts...should you stop drafting QBs?
If there is a FA QB available who has shown some success at this level and you can get him for the same price.. why take a chance on another unproven draft pick?
Your right, that is an option. But considering most teams that have been to the Super Bowl over the history of the NFL consisted of teams that drafted a 1st round QB. Now it doesn't mean there are not exceptions to the rule, like Brady or maybe some day Cassell or perhaps Romo, but if history points in one direction shouldn't history be a good indicator?
If most successful teams do thing one way and your failing at it, it could mean the right people are not in the right job. Or it could mean it isn't working for ya, move on to something else.
There really is no right or wrong answer to this. The most important thing is having the right person doing whatever it is that they do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,960 |
Quote:
Do you really think he advised Lerner against Pioli given that he was the first guy Lerner interviewed, or do you think he was one of the recommendations given (maybe even the top recommendation) and Lerner, knowing that choosing his own head coach would eliminate Pioli, chose Mangini over him anyway?
I'll answer that if I may.. From my perspective,, No, I don't think he advised lerner to steer clear of Pioli.
I think what Accorsi did was to advise Lerner on the type of guy he needed. Then that led to Lerner deciding against Pioli.
We'll never know this of course.. nobody will ever tell, but if I had a guess I'd say it came down to Pioli or Mangini.... Each choice having upside and downside. Each bringing something else of value to the table
And in the end, Lerner felt that it was better to have a coach with experience as a HC than a GM with no actual experience being the lead dog and wanting all the control. After all, it's pretty clear that's what he just had and it didn't work out so well. Why the hell would he do it again.
It's sound reasoning whether you chose to accept it or not.
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"He has to be one of the leading contenders for any GM job," Accorsi said. "He knows talent. He knows what makes teams successful. He's already a top executive. I don't know of an ingredient the job requires that he doesn't have. And what I love about him is he's always trying to learn, always trying to get better. He doesn't act like he has all the answers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enough said.
I don't think that is anywhere near "enough said" as you put it. It doesn't prove anything other than Accorsi has some respect for Pioli....
Like I said, I don't believe for one second that Accorsi tried to push, steer or lead Lerner away from Pioli. I think he listened to what the owner wanted, gave his advice based on that desire...
Now, since we know that Accorsi was advising Lerner, (I think that's pretty much been established) you will note, that if Accorsi thought that hiring Mangini and going after a different, non-prototypical GM, was a bad idea, then I think it's safe to say, Mangini wouldn't be our coach right now.
But he is,,, so is that to say that Accorsi didn't find anything wrong with the decision? Yup, I think that's exactly what it's saying.
But you have to explain something to me Spec.... why was it NOT ok for the Browns to hire Mangini after only a few interviews, but it's perfectly OK for KC to hire Pioli after only a few interviews..
You complain about the method, as is your right, but geez, can you please apply the logic consistently..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,217 |
Quote:
If you draft a QB and he busts, than draft another and he busts, than draft another and he busts...should you stop drafting QBs?
No, you try again until you get it right. Just because the system failed 3 times don't mean the system is wrong. Maybe the right people are not in the right positions to make the system work. It is not so white and black as "we did this 3 times to no avail".
We've done what you suggested THREE times already. Now go look at history and think about it for a minute
So you never bring in a "veteran" until you find a rookie who "works"? This isn't about "players", it's about coaches. You have a 53 man roster with multiple QB's, but only one HC who leads, prepares and manages the entire team. So with your QB comparison, just lose, lose, lose for years, keep drafting and never bring in a veteran so you can be productive until ou find a long term solution? Maybe that's what you're used to and have grown to accept. But why not get experience at the HC position if that option is available?
Look at the last ten SB winners. How many of THEM had "first time NFL HC's"?
I'm not saying it "can't work". But history dictates the odds will be drasticly reduced.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it".
And how many "first time HC's" have turned around a struggling team to win a SB?
I've done a LOT of homework on this subject. And I know over the past decade, the most successfull formula has NOT been a first time NFL HC.
Now if you're a storied franchise, loaded with talent? Your odds may be better. But neither the Chiefs nor the Browns fit into that category.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 449 |
Quote:
Quote:
If you draft a QB and he busts, than draft another and he busts, than draft another and he busts...should you stop drafting QBs?
No, you try again until you get it right. Just because the system failed 3 times don't mean the system is wrong. Maybe the right people are not in the right positions to make the system work. It is not so white and black as "we did this 3 times to no avail".
We've done what you suggested THREE times already. Now go look at history and think about it for a minute
So you never bring in a "veteran" until you find a rookie who "works"? This isn't about "players", it's about coaches. You have a 53 man roster with multiple QB's, but only one HC who leads, prepares and manages the entire team. So with your QB comparison, just lose, lose, lose for years, keep drafting and never bring in a veteran so you can be productive until ou find a long term solution? Maybe that's what you're used to and have grown to accept. But why not get experience at the HC position if that option is available?
Look at the last ten SB winners. How many of THEM had "first time NFL HC's"?
I'm not saying it "can't work". But history dictates the odds will be drasticly reduced.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it".
And how many "first time HC's" have turned around a struggling team to win a SB?
I've done a LOT of homework on this subject. And I know over the past decade, the most successfull formula has NOT been a first time NFL HC.
Now if you're a storied franchise, loaded with talent? Your odds may be better. But neither the Chiefs nor the Browns fit into that category.
My fault, I thought you were referring to the power structure of GM/HC.
I thought you meant you'd prefer a HC that has some power typical of a GM.
I misinterpretted your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
What's your reasoning?
The question is why would I choose Mang/Koki over Pioli/Spags.
My answers are numerous.
Only one name in that group is a proven guy in the job he's beinghired for: Mangini.
While it'll always be the head coach who takes the fall for a team, it was Brett Favre who nearly single-handedly caused the Jets to go from 8-3 to 9-7, throwing 2 TD's and 9 INT's on the way to a collapse.
I also love the fact that he didn't let Favre do as he wished, as Mangini would call him out for not sticking to the gameplan. Tannenbaum was the guy behind Favre, not Mangini, who was so-so to the idea. If Brett Favre can't get away with anything, then ego-maniacs like Winslow and Edwards won't either. That was one of RAC's great failings, and one of the things about Mangini I really like. Too many people said RAC was a "father figure" to them. I don't like the things that statement infers. Savage and RAC made Edwards the face of the franchise, and that fed his ego to where he was almost untouchable. That will end here and now. I'm encouraged by the fact that the players spoke out on behalf of Mangini after he was fired, DESPITE the fact he wasn't a "father figure" such as RAC.
To summarize, Mangini represents the things RAC failed at being, which is what I felt the team needed desperately. I think a teams desperation move to get Favre ultimately cost Mangini his job, so their loss is our gain.
I'm also an advocate of the 3-4 defense as well as the WCO. I don't know that we are for sure going with a WCO, as there's been just too much wasted type on this board over the past month to read it all, but I think we stand a chance of being there. Mangini has allready stated he'll stick with the 3-4. Spags is a 4-3 guy.
So does that mean I think Spags will fail? No. I do think that many coordinators would look good with the front-7 that the Giants have marched out there over the past few years.
So what about Koki over Pioli? I think the coach is more important to this team right now (which isn't the same as Lerner saying the HC is more important than the GM in general). I don't have enough info to know which guy is better in terms of the draft, so to form an opinion wouldn't be fair. I've also been of the opinion that a GM gets too much credit when it's the cap guy, the pro personnel guy, and the college scouting guy who are more important.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Pioli to join Chiefs
|
|
