thesubmittedone

Moderators
  • Content Count

    14,991
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Everything posted by thesubmittedone

  1. Yup, I really hope our media members ask him good questions tomorrow about this. I wonder if Dan is going to take questions, too? He should. Perhaps my favorite aspect of the hire is what Ron said about the roles he’d like to see for player personnel acquisition organizationally. It can easily mean nothing because Jay had the same idea, but that’s nonetheless awesome to hear and I hope he’s able to follow through. This is the part of the Snyder Cycle were accustomed to where, out of desperation, he cedes pretty much everything to the new, veteran, coach after hiring the inexperienced guy with a high ceiling. In the past that cessation simply doesn’t last for long and the structure/support around them still hinders them considerably. But the good news is this is the first time within said Snyder Cycle we actually have the coach himself recognizing he can’t and/or shouldn’t do it all himself. That’s what has me really excited. And as an added, massive bonus, Larry Hess was fired. Which means Snyder’s “guys” and his structuring of the organization which was, by far, the biggest obstacle to success (contrary to what our resident geniuses claim here who think they can assess coaching at a high level consistently), is all up for change. As long as Rivera holds true to his word about it, we might be ok. Even if we didn’t get rid of Allen in time to really find a TP or GM before his hire. The priorities seem to be there on the surface. And I think it’s better they take their time with it instead of: 1) Just elevating someone like Schaffer or Kyle before Ron gets a chance to work with them and; 2) Just hiring someone from a limited pool since most qualified candidates are still under contract with their respective teams. The potential for failure there is still very real, nonetheless. Ron can end up dictating they make a comfort hire as opposed to the best hire. And he might end up getting greedy about final say if he gets a taste, contrary to what he said about it recently. But it’s all more promising than anything we’ve had in a long, long time.
  2. Oh no, I totally understood what you were getting at and the topic you were addressing. I was just trying to put it in the nicest way I could, but I’ll be blunt now, I think the topic is a useless one and the data unimportant. Also, because it came after my post in which I wasn’t addressing that specifically, but was addressing VOR’s point of “there’s no reason in the world it has to happen that way”, I felt like it was important for me to clarify and expand on it. So my issue was actually with the specificity of the topic itself. Here’s the thing. You could’ve just asked me if it ever actually happens in the NFL. Instead of all that tedious work, I would’ve told you sure it does. The main point, however, is when many of us are talking about the “right way it’s done”, what we’re looking for is the ideal - the best way to do it. Not if it’s done another way at times or not. Now, I do understand that some have the idea that we’re the only team doing it like that, so I guess you can address that, but forgive me for thinking that’s not only a massive waste of time but also pretty insignificant to the bottom line. The problem with just addressing this topic alone and presenting that data is it can give people a sense that the ideal is being reached when it’s not necessarily. In fact, if you were to look at most (not all) of the posters who “liked” your post, they are among those who downplay the organizational roles and structure most conducive to success often and even, admittedly, don’t really care much about the GM position. That’s the problem with it, whether you meant that to happen or not. So contextualizing that data is vital. You choosing to present it to address that specific topic is the issue itself, for me. I believe, for instance, were we to ask the owners/execs who ended up hiring the way they did, they’d even tell you it wasn’t ideal but that it’s necessary because of the reality of GM contracts running through the draft. Some just wait and make those changes in May, others just say screw it and choose from a limited pool, perhaps out of fear they don’t get their desired candidates after waiting. Just based on that, you could actually argue that the data you presented is evidence it is the “right way”, since even with that hindrance of GM contracts you still have many being hired first. Either way, it’s important to contextualize it. Just saying “it happens in the NFL” really isn’t significant in any meaningful way. I hope that clarifies where I’m coming from. You might not care, and you’re not wrong about the data addressing that specific issue, but that’s the problem itself for me.
  3. Oh man, thanks for that. Like I said, I need you guys to stop playing with my emotions like that. Very, very good news.
  4. Totally get it, it’s just hard to think you need to make sweeping changes to that staff while ignoring the guy in charge of that staff. It’s bottom up stuff. Anyway, let’s wait and see. But I couldn’t be happier this is, at the very least, being addressed in some way. I’ve been on the “something is definitely wrong with the Athletic Training Staff” thing for a long time and pretty much by my lonesome, lol. Most don’t even know the difference between that staff, the Medical staff, and the Strength and Conditioning Staff. I made this a couple weeks ago about what I needed to see after Bruce’s removal: https://es.redskins.com/topic/418348-the-bruce-allengm-thread/?do=findComment&comment=11662608 So while it’s not happening exactly how I wanted, it’s something. And I’m happy about that.
  5. Wait, what!? Why would he be safe if his own employees were an issue? Ugh, just when I was starting to get really excited. It’s really hard to believe he had no hand in the issues there, but maybe it was more about being undermined in his role and the structure than his job. I don’t know. You guys are just playing with my emotions now.
  6. Such wonderful news and cause for celebration... but it’s just one, long overdue, step in a sea of them that need to occur. I’m especially happy for those of us who’ve been on this train of not only recognizing it, but honing in on Bruce’s terrible job all the while making it a point not to trash anyone else in the process. You guys know who you are. I know how hard it’s been. Aaaaaaaand there’s another one of those steps I was looking for. If this is true... just, wow.
  7. Oof, so many things wrong with the method you used to arrive to this conclusion, but at least you admitted it was tedious and you didn’t want to delve deeper, so I can see why. I’ll skip the issues you already mentioned about the research and how limited it was. The biggest problem here is I’m not sure why you’d ignore all the times a GM was already in place and either lead or had a hand in the search for a new coach, and just relegated it to what’s happening with the Skins now, but there are extenuating circumstances that make it difficult to hire a new GM when coaches get fired at the end of the season due to the timing. So this doesn’t change much of anything in terms of how the NFL operates. The only thing this proves is that the scouting department and its head executive are largely in place around the NFL at the end of a season when coaches get fired, their contracts aren’t up, and thus it’s harder to hire them at that time since it’s a smaller pool of candidates. Still, you see it happening often, which actually makes it more significant to the general point being made about which should come first. Only separating it so that you’re looking exclusively at GMs and HCs being fired at the same time and what happens next simply doesn’t effect the reality of those positions and which is prioritized during the hiring process. It also ignores which teams were successful and which teams weren’t in how they did it. Also, was it only GMs you looked at or did you include various other titles that largely fill the same role, like EVP of Football Operations? I wouldn’t count the Chiefs since he was already in house, which likely means they already had that planned out. Ravens had Newsome at GM at the time Harbaugh was hired Steelers had Kevin Colbert at Director of Football Operations (they actually never had someone with the GM title until 2011 when they just gave it to Colbert himself) who was heavily involved in hiring Tomlin. But, yeah, it can work. It’s more about how the roles are structured after the hiring process, but I definitely believe the organizational priority is better one way than the other. —————————————— Oops, just saw that TK closed this thread, sorry fellas. I don’t feel like copy and pasting this elsewhere... so, uhm, you guys can do it and post it in the “Allen fired” thread or something if you want to continue this discussion.
  8. I understand why you’re saying this, as it’s acceptable on the surface, but I couldn’t disagree more with this take. An analogy to ponder, first. You’re being trained by an expert archer. He tells you how to breathe calmly and with pace, how your shoulders should feel, where your hands need to be, what your eyes should be focused on, etc... and then tells you to shoot. You miss the mark. Do you say screw it, scrap the whole thing, I’m not listening to you, I’m going to do it my own way? Or do you take another shot? This is pretty much what you’re advocating, or I guess I should say insinuating, here. The Browns did everything right organizationally. The hiring process and the structure created was solid and how the majority of sustainably successful franchises have operated. It’s ok if Dorsey fails. The NFL is uber-competitive and difficult to build a contender. You take another shot at it. You don’t just scrap that entire process and structure. You keep trying until it works. You don’t say, “well, it’s all a crap shoot screw this it doesn’t matter really”, and justify going some other route because of it. If you think you can innovate and be a pioneer in the field, fine, great, wonderful... but any innovator and pioneer will tell you they mastered the fundamentals first BEFORE they could truly innovate. Otherwise it’s just chaos. So, yes, sustained success for any GM is difficult to attain. But that’s not a function of the GM, that’s a function of the NFL. You don’t downplay that role because of it. Besides, I find this whole obsession with the Browns weird. They did improve, didn’t they? I mean, that team was so bad they couldn’t win a game for two years. It was historically awful. They won 7 games this year. They’ve actually come along, just not as fast as many hyped up. We shouldn’t trash everyone involved for that, should we? They made some mistakes with some pieces, but the overall process was sound. Stay on it. But as many of us said at the time, Haslam is as impulsive and reactionary as Dan. Who knows what’s happening inside that building right now, lol. Even if these guys stay around for the most part, it could be ugly in there. Yes, the only thing that matters is how they work together, but that’s AFTER the hiring process. There’s actually a pretty damn good reason the hiring process has been traditionally one way and not the other. If the GM is picking the players, you want that guy to identify what coach and scheme goes best with the type of players they’re good at evaluating and discovering. Now, the ideal is to get as many multi-dimensional players as possible to fit any scheme at any time and so that the coach can be flexible in what he does (which would in turn minimize the significance of specific coaching styles), but there’s a salary cap, a draft, and a limited roster you have to battle 31 other teams with in managing at the pro level. Which makes that virtually impossible outside of anomalous situations. So what’s the next best thing and quickest way to build a solid team? Focus on a certain style of play and scheme, identify those players that fit it, and attempt to bring them all in at the same time for a coach who excels at teaching that style of play and scheme. Which means that there’s a very good, perfectly rational thought process in making the GM come first during the hiring process and why that’s traditionally been the way it’s done. There’s simply way more at stake in managing those resources at a high enough level, quickly enough, to downplay that like you’re doing here. To be fair, after that hiring process is completed, your structuring of the organization where they’re both equally accountable to another executive (who knows what they’re doing, of course) is acceptable and can work. It’s pretty much exactly what we had with Gibbs, Beathard and JCK back in the day... Beathard did lead the hiring process to acquire Gibbs, had final say over personnel and gave Gibbs what he needed personnel-wise to succeed, but both reported to JCK equally. As long as both are staying in their lanes and the roles/titles given to them by Dan or his top executive are given the authority and span of control relative to their expertise, they’re set up for success. Alas, that has essentially NEVER happened under Dan. Now, can the hiring process be done the other way around? Sure. But that’s the more difficult route. Coaches are already so busy with regards to what they’re doing they rarely have time to evaluate and scout players at a high enough level, never mind actually evaluating the scouts/executives themselves! Which is why they just end up picking execs they’ve been with before and know, even if said execs are not necessarily adept at fulfilling that role for them. By the nature of their roles, coaches are short sighted and shouldn’t look too far ahead. They have to teach and develop these players NOW. GMs, on the other hand, have their entire time devoted to the big picture of resource management and asset acquisition. So, yes, there’s plenty of good reasons why that’s the case and certainly far from “no reason in the world”.
  9. You’re right that it gets thrown around too much (by those who don’t really grasp it) and about the communication stuff, for sure, as that’s key to everything. But that’s not at all what “final say” should mean. It means that after all the voices, reports, rankings, etc... are given to him, he has the ultimate authority on what to do with it. Who does he trust the most on what matter and why? And if it all fails, he’s the clear authority responsible for it. I don’t think anyone with final say ignores everything given to him and just does what he wants. That’d be insane and it’d be a clear failure regarding his own span of control. Why even have any supporting roles working for you in that case? That is absolutely vital because it means there can be an hierarchy, authority and a span of control clearly delineated so that there’s accountability for everyone involved. He’d be able to promote those doing a good job, give them their proper roles relative to their expertise, and eliminate the weak links quickly as it’s all filtering up to him without anyone being able to blame someone else or creating factions by usurping him. The additional problems here are that: 1) Those who’ve been given that have either been coaches who weren’t deserving of it (vast majority aren’t and shouldn’t be in that position anyway) or executives who were previously out of the league and had failed at their previous stints. 2) Due to the generally vague and weak structure Dan has created, they can get undermined at any time, so even having that authority at one point doesn’t guarantee anything. A faction can be created from within that has Dan’s ear and, thus, there’s no need to be loyal to anyone else at any time. Which in turn creates an atmosphere of distrust, division, and destroys the cohesion necessary to attain the goals set via the culture being established. Success becomes retaining your job with Dan versus actually focusing on the field. Bruce was actually an extremely successful Team President under Dan’s organizational setup. And while we hear a lot of good things about Schafer, his success in that regard is a major concern, as well. Same goes for guys like Larry Hess, the Head Athletic Trainer. These guys have been extremely successful and have thrived attaining the main goal Dan has set up via the culture he’s established there. The concern there is that the results on the field are clearly secondary and they simply do not need to be accountable or loyal to anyone other than Dan. Instead, based on proper hierarchy, they should rise or fall with each other outside of less egregious mistakes and Dan should have made that clear, organizationally, from the onset. And that’s not necessarily a knock on either of them, it’s Dan’s culture. If that changes for the better, they might be able to shine. Nonetheless, it’s a major concern. I’d say with Hess more so than Schafer based on all that we hear from players, agents and media. Either way, it’s really important that we see the new faces coming in here being able to really change what they want no matter the tenure or comfortability they have with Dan. Final say over personnel is a significant part of that, as the above definitely rings true with the players, too, especially at QB. Hopefully, if Ron is the guy, he meant what he said about not wanting final say over personnel, but wanting to collaborate heavily and have control over the active 46. That is how the majority of successful franchises have operated and it was refreshing to read that quote from him. He gets it on that point. My fear is Dan is so desperate, that’s how he sells the job to him and Ron gets tempted enough by it.
  10. Yeah, like I said, I’m with you on that. It’s unorthodox, of course, but maybe it works out. That Rivera quote about personnel was lovely to see. He might be the one to inspire that... it’s just unfortunate if it’s not Dan himself implementing it. We’ll see.
  11. I’m with you, but I wouldn’t go that far. I just want organizational competence that allows everyone within it to thrive. I want the team to be known for its environment being conducive to success, where we consistently have coaches, scouts and players doing well and, even if they leave, we replace them with relative ease since we understand how to allow people to grow and place them in their proper roles. I’m tired of the villains and scapegoats. I’m tired of good football people coming here and eventually leaving as shells of themselves where, instead of growth, we see their strengths diminish and weaknesses highlighted increasingly as time goes by (outside of a few who are fortunately shielded by others from the top brass). Only for them to become the target of fan ire because, yeah, they look and act like idiots at that point. Surprise surprise. I could go on and on about this, you know that, lol. But I’ll just leave it at that.
  12. This is 100% the right take to have, but unfortunately it’s already too late. The moment we drafted Haskins when Jay was a lame duck we already began the process of organizational mistiming that is a Snyder fixture. In fact, I’d say the two biggest, consistent, failings of Snyder’s ownership has been his reactionary behavior as well as his horrendous timing (the latter of which is partly a function of the former). Which is crazy because you’d think the lack of proper organizational structure was enough! It’s so hard to have any cohesion or loyalty when things are done this way. How Bruce was able to even fire Jay without it meaning he was even more deserving of being let go makes zero sense. Only in Dan’s mind is that even remotely sensical organizationally. If we’re to take most of the reports coming from legit sources at face value, Bruce is still around acting as Team President while Snyder is looking for a coach by himself. Never mind the issues with that, of which there are many, but what is he looking for exactly according to these reports? A veteran coach. A guy who’s been around in the NFL and has experience as HC. Say it with me. Reactionary. Why is that so important? Because the previous hire was an up comer in Jay who didn’t have previous HC experience, that must be the problem says Dan! You see, it can’t be anything he did. It can’t be his top exec perpetually failing at resource management in the worst of ways! It can’t be the poorly structured environment he’s created in which brings out the worst in people and the longer they remain, the more their strengths diminish while their weaknesses get highlighted. We can’t wonder why inexperience is such an issue and there’s little to no growth and development that occurs within this environment! Nope, never that Dan!!! Because, surely, experienced vet at HC who gets hired never fails in the NFL! That’s the perfect criterion to prioritize during this “hiring process” if we can call it that, right Dan!? Brilliant! What if the best, most qualified guy for the job comes from that pool of inexperience? Well, now, thanks to Dan, we’ll never know. He simply doesn’t have the ability to assess that and, hey, the last one was inexperienced and failed... so, yup, let’s flip it and try this now because, you know, that inexperience must’ve been the biggest reason why he failed! Reactionary with terrible timing and zero self reflection. Just total flip flops philosophically, no solid ground to be found. That’s our beloved owner. And, thus far, every report we’ve received points to those two attributes still being prevalent. Hopefully we get surprised. I’m still holding on to that one last shred of hope that sees Bruce totally out, a legit GM hired with respected personnel chops and a coach that matches what he wants to do well, and it all coming as a result of a professional hiring process that went through the NFL’s best. If it’s Rivera as the reports are pointing to now, I’m holding on desperately to that one quote he had about not expecting final say over personnel showing that HE, AT LEAST, GETS IT. So maybe he’ll be the one to force the change in Dan. It won’t be orthodox, of course, but it’s all we have right now.
  13. See my last post. We’ll find out soon. I know I won’t be deluded by any smoke and mirrors and I’ll be suspicious of it all for some time. It’s what Dan has done. Hopefully we get a clear organizational hierarchy and we hear all the right things. But it’ll just be a start.
  14. You meant don’t, right? Well, I don’t. I don’t generally like the emphasis Dan has placed on the HC position here. They’re overburdened and overwhelmed and it doesn’t flow well organizationally with the other roles meant to support it. But if Rivera understands the importance of someone who is an expert at talent evaluation having final say, then that’s big for me and I don’t mind it as much.
  15. The two things I like most about him, right now with as little as I know at least, is that... 1) He’s clearly viewed as super classy by everyone who knows him and; 2) He understands that a coach shouldn’t have final say on personnel outside of picking the active 46: He’s smart for saying that. That being said, Dan has shown little to no idea how to structure an organization and just might hand it to him anyway... and it might be too enticing for him to turn down to his own detriment.
  16. I think what so many don’t realize is the pettiness, ugliness, and bitterness they see is mostly a reflection on Dan and his top exec. I can’t help but feel the ones here complaining that there’s no positivity aren’t noticing that in order to be positive, in order to believe in Dan and his top exec, you eventually find yourself accepting the scapegoats and villains of their creation. Which means you’re as negative as anyone, you just target those you deem acceptable to be targeted by buying into the organizational propaganda, which in turn gives you a false sense of being a “better fan”. Doesn’t matter if they’re actually the productive ones or are doing the best they can for the object of your fandom, you’ll still hate them for failing while ignoring or downplaying the constructs of their failure that made it inevitable. The factions and divisions here, which lead to agenda-based discussions versus open ones, are all a reflection of what’s happening inside the building. Fandom will always include extremes, but when the people you’re rooting for within the building are constantly divided because of an organizational environment and culture that encourages it, you can’t expect anything else other than it transferring to the fans who desperately want to buy in. Imagine two decades of this transference occurring continuously and what it’s done to the levels of discourse we try to reach here on ES. The moment that changes with Dan and how he structures the organization, you’ll see it reflect in the fanbase, as well. Which will have a positive carryover anywhere the team is discussed, for that matter. @ConnSKINS26 alluded to this when he mentioned how, in the past, we were all much more naive and, thus, it was an easier time because most of us shared in that naiveté and could buy in with little to no problems. I make it a habit to look elsewhere and compare ES to other outlets of discussion all the time. They all suffer from the same thing. It’s not the outlets themselves, though some lend to different forms of discussion, but the fanbase itself. Most intelligent people who know how to carry a discussion are simply too tired and overwhelmed by it all to be encouraged to participate. They’ve learned long ago these are core, organizational issues that emanate from the top and know they’re just witnessing a bad cycle repeating itself with the only difference being the names. What you have left of the fanbase who are willing to participate consistently are mostly those obsessed with furthering their factional/scapegoating/divisive narratives while being oblivious to the core issue or willingly ignoring it since that’s really the only hope remaining. And then you have the few who remain attempting to counter that. So, yeah, it’s ugly. It sucks. No matter what side you’re on, it’s negative. And many just don’t want to be a part of it. Again, that’ll change if Dan does. It’s that simple. There is no one else to blame for it.
  17. @KDawg Maybe I’ll get into it another time as to why I think those examples you gave (Belichick, Reid, Gibbs) not only don’t hurt my point, but actually further prove it big time... but I’ve got too much on my plate right now. I’ve actually went over those three recently in some of the posts I’ve made on the topic here over the last couple months if you’d like to see the counter to it. Can just look at my posting history, not much you’ve got to scour through to find it. But, yeah, I’m glad you understand the overarching point. And even if you were 100% right about how you view those examples, which I don’t believe is the case even with them, they’d still be an anomaly more than the general rule. Which you understand, clearly.
  18. Yup. 2013 was really when I started digging in and researching more about Front Offices in the NFL and how the organizational structure looks from the vast majority of successful franchises both long term or even short term. It’s when I learned just how much coaching in the NFL is over-emphasized, just how much they need to be set up for success organizationally, the issues with making the HC role/title the most powerful one outside of the owner, and how these guys can and will be targeted vehemently by media/fanbases who don’t know anything, but are brainwashed by owners and executives into thinking it’s all on them. The most convenient scapegoats. Totally changed me as a fan and, unfortunately, made it impossible to just turn a blind eye to Snyder’s incredibly negative impact on everything. It’s fascinating to read stuff like that again. And it’s just as discouraging to see the same type of nonsense proliferated to this day. Thanks for posting it. Btw, I edited the title to adhere to rule 10 better, as well as make it more accurate that it’s an older article.
  19. I don’t know what you’re talking about, I’m an extremely stable individual.
  20. Their argument is that improvisational plays or plays outside of the confines of the offense are so unpredictable and unlike each other, that you just don’t know how they’ll project to the future. So plays from a clean pocket are better indicators because they tell you if the QB is doing his job in identifying the defense, throwing accurately and on time, and showing good mechanics in general. I can get what they’re saying there, as that’s one of my annoyances with how people judge QB play, though I’m not sure I’d go as far as saying what they did about it being the best predictor or whatever. Let me put it this way; there are two plays that result equally in a 15 yard completion: 1) One consists of the QB operating efficiently from the pocket, correctly identifying the defense while having a mastery of the offense to know where to go with the ball based on whatever concept they’re running. Post snap he even identifies any change in the coverage, makes a subtle move he needs to within the pocket, and then hits the right guy with anticipation and accuracy. 2) The other play has the QB fail at correctly diagnosing the defense, or he doesn’t have the mastery over the offense to know where to go with the ball even if he does, but post snap he eludes one or two rushers behind the LOS, keeps his eyes downfield and finds his man who was effective getting open for his QB in a scramble drill by improvising... Again, result is the same in this scenario, a 15 yard completion. Which play has fans lose their minds over and which one has fans not viewing as anything special? I think we can all agree the majority of media, fans, and general viewers will automatically love the second play and will view that QB as having done something “better” than the other. The reality is, the first one is more sustainable and a better indicator of good QB play. The second is just more exciting, but can lead to more potential for injuries among a myriad of other issues. But that’s just one case. One can argue that the QB improvising more has a better chance of getting even bigger plays as it stresses the defensive coverage for longer. So it’s certainly not that simple to apply it in a generalized manner. Of course, a QB that can do both consistently is what we’re all looking for, but those QBs themselves try to accomplish play number one more often than play number two for a reason. There’s a lot more nuance to it and evaluating it is extremely difficult for us as fans considering we don’t have access to every play call or route concept and how it’s being taught against various coverages, but yeah, that’s why I can get with what they’re saying about it to some degree. Again, I’m not sure though that I agree it’s the “best indicator” or “most stable way” to predict success... but it makes some sense.
  21. You are a gentleman and a scholar kind sir. But too late.
  22. We never stopped anyone from making a thread. If something is too similar or too problematic and would take up the entire board, that’s when we merge or lock threads. And that’s really all we do, it’s rare for someone to actually get penalized for it, so it’s not the end of the world. Something like that Trent interview would’ve likely stayed open if someone felt it deserved its own thread. If they had any doubt, they could start with, “I think this deserves its own thread, but if the Mods think otherwise, I understand...” Threads like that are almost never shut down. Ever. It’s probably like 95% survival rate or something, lol. We’re just not in the business of constantly dictating whether the users want mega threads or not. Some people love them and don’t want to scour the board for multiple threads while others hate them and bring up points like the one you just did. We went through all this with the twitter thread before. People legitimately got hurt when we tried to stop the “mega thread”, lol.
  23. Lol, good stuff... but, on a serious note, that is why I started my post with “I have way too high a standard now, especially for someone like Dan”... It is what it is. That’s all for me to not remain pessimistic and buy into it while remaining skeptical Dan won’t ruin it at a moment’s notice. If only some part of what I wrote occurs, I’ll like what I can, dislike what should be disliked, but overall remain more pessimistic that the organization is structured properly enough to set anyone up for success. So, yeah, just kind of detailing what my emotional state would be dependent on what occurs. Not what I think will happen, just what needs to happen for it to be affected significantly. Dan has done too much damage at this point for anything else.