Voice_of_Reason

The Philosophy Thread: HC First, GM/FO First, or does it matter?

What is your Philosophy?  

86 members have voted

  1. 1. Which do you prefer

    • HC Centric Approach is better. Give the HC the power to choose the FO
    • GM/FO Centric Approach is better. The FO should be in place first and choose the coach
    • It Doesn't Matter


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Maybe.  The question though is would Dan co-opt that somehow.   The difference to me with the coach is the coach can't hang with Dan at the stadium before the game and after and certainly not during it.  He's dealing with the team.  Weeknights -- game prep.  The GM on the other hand...


Yeah, I totally get that, and I think it’s a valid point... but like I said in the above post, if said coach is also GM that means there are still plenty of opportunities for Dan to recreate that issue. Maybe not as many as you’re pointing out, and again that’s a strong point, but the opportunity is still going to be prevalent when the coach is operating in “GM mode”. Especially during the off-season.  

 

11 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Agree, the question to me is where would he inflict the least damage.


Yeah, I mean we’re on the same wavelength here, it’s just I’d like to see someone legit in that role with the power it’s supposed to have before I can be sure that Dan‘s worst habits would still hinder him. I’m not disputing your reading on Dan itself in terms of the problem we have with him and his social issues at all. The nitpick is with the conclusion you get from it in terms of what it means organizationally. 
 

Like, if Kyle Smith isn’t that type to just want to hang out with Dan and be BFFs (and I honestly don’t think any legitimately qualified person for that role would want to be, either), then that’s enough of an answer for me to the Dan problem. At least for now. I just don’t want to accept that this is the only way for Dan, not until I see that actually happen for once. 
 

18 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I get this.  But I have no faith in him to work this part out well.  In some ways I am actually an optimist about Dan.  For example, I am not one of the people here who thinks we can never win with Dan.  I do think we can get lucky and win in spite of him.  But I've given up on the idea that he's going to change.  I can see him improving some.  And I even buy into the narrative that he doesn't interfere like he used to.  But I still think he can't help himself from interfering some.  I think he has no idea of what good culture means albeit at least he is spouting the right lines on that front in that press conference.  But my theory is his weird need to turn Redskins Park into his own private fraternity (hyperbole some from me to make a point) is never going away.


What I already said in this post pretty much covers this, but just to make it as clear as possible, I don’t reject any of this regarding your views on Dan. I think it’s pretty much spot on. The only difference is I’d need to first see an actual qualified GM/EVP of Player Personnel with final say over the roster, something we’ve never had under Dan before for any significant period of time, before concluding that it simply won’t work with Dan and the only way is to have a HC with ultimate power. 
 

Basically, that the problem with Dan’s social ineptitude could have more to do with the unqualified people he’s had in that position (which lead to them taking advantage of said social ineptitude by being his BFF to maintain their positions) versus the actual organizational structure having anything to do with it. 
 

Does that make sense? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:


 

Basically, that the problem with Dan’s social ineptitude could have more to do with the unqualified people he’s had in that position (which lead to them taking advantage of said social ineptitude by being his BFF to maintain their positions) versus the actual organizational structure having anything to do with it. 
 

Does that make sense? 

 

Could be.  Your point is something like a competent GM might also bring competent people skills who would manage Dan properly in that way versus the incompetent GMs who manage Dan in the worst way for their own political gain inside the building?  If so, yeah that's certainly possible.  Some would say that's what happened when Gibbs was here, he knew how to manage Dan supposedly -- unfortunately Gibbs was no GM and Vinny was in the building at the same time. 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So on his morning show, Galdi did a segment on this where he compared Vinny and Bruce to being Dams binky.  And somebody tweeted the show and asked what a binky was. And Al kept on going on and on about Dan needing a binky.  And did Alex really want to become Dan’s binky. It was really funny.  
 

Personally, I rather doubt Alex wants to be Dan’s binky.  I would suggest Cooley and Porto’s as suitable binkies.  
 

I also think, for this owner, it really is best if there’s one person responsible for managing him, and right now Ron is that guy. It might not work elsewhere, but it might have to work here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the point below is the product of the decision by committee nonsense that Bruce among others would celebrate when they talked about it.  Listening to some who cover the team, the impression they gave is everyone gets their player.  Bruce gets his guy.  Dan gets his guy,  Lets throw a bone to Jay on this dude.  When Doug said last year that they don't sign-draft players that fit scheme.  I believe him.  This year, Rivera-Kyle have said the opposite, they are looking for players who fit the scheme. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/03/11/redskins-rebuild/

Establish an identity — and find the right players for it

Former Redskins player Logan Paulsen remembered how, early in his career, McVay, then a Redskins assistant coach, told him that only about five players on each NFL roster could excel on any team in the league; everyone else is a role player.

One of the reasons the Redskins have struggled over the past few years, Paulsen said, is because they didn’t have a clear identity. They didn’t acquire role players with a vision. When coaches pulled in different directions, the parts didn’t add up.

“I’m not saying one identity is better than the other — passing the ball, running the ball, whatever,” Paulsen said. “I’m just saying establishing a clear offensive and defensive identity allows you to be more effective.”

One agent who regularly deals with the Redskins believes the team now has direction.

“They’re going to be disciplined and they’re going to have a plan,” he said. “Right or wrong, they’ll stick to their plan. You won’t see them being all over the board like you’ve seen at times in the past. They might not turn it around right away, but at least you’ll see them building toward something in a way that makes sense.”

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Skinsinparadise I'm not sure if it's the committee related stuff, it more was that there was absolutely no plan of what they wanted to be or do since Shanahan left.  Shanahan, for better or worse, knew what type of team he wanted them to be.  At least offensively.  You could see they targeted specific type of linemen, receivers who could block, TEs who were good at setting the edge...  It made sense. 

 

However, defensivley, they were still a bit of a mess.

 

Before Shanahan, and after Shanahn, they have had no semblance of a plan. It's just been, "lets get this collection of players together and see what happens." Then they handed them to a coach who was ill-fitted for that type of scenario.  So it was basically a debacle.  

 

I'm much more confident now that Ron has a plan, and he's going to work to that plan.  And it might take a while, but they're going to operate with a purpose.

 

Doug said something a while ago which just infuriated me.  Something like, "we're not in with the coaches, we aren't evaluating players based on scheme."  And that seemed like the absolute stupidest thing I had ever heard in my life.  If you're NOT evaluating how a player would fit in YOUR organization, then what in the Sam Hill are you actually doing?  It speaks to the divide between the personnel and the coaching staff, and most likely Bruce trying to keep things separate.  

 

My hope is now there's at least a direction.  Which is at least a step in the right direction...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise I'm not sure if it's the committee related stuff, it more was that there was absolutely no plan of what they wanted to be or do since Shanahan left.  

 

Shanny was somewhat the defacto GM but supposedly was overruled from time to time.  After he left, Bruce became the defacto GM but he seemed to act publicly like he wasn't.  And behind the scenes the picture that seemed to be painted was Bruce sometimes would adamantly do his thing even if others in the building disagreed.  And then sometimes Bruce relented and gave someone else, Jay, Doug or whomever the call about so and so.  And so on.  So it was like a little bit of everyone.

 

Doug would let the cat out of the bag about it from time to time especially when the argument seem to serve his take in a positive way at that given time so I gather he wasn't sharing the situations when he was on the wrong side (in retrospect) of the equation.   Taking Doug's take for example along with one of the mod insiders, its not hard to piece together that Jay and likely Kyle wanted Derwin James over Payne with Doug-Bruce and I presume Dan pushing Payne. 

 

10 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@Skinsinparadise 

Doug said something a while ago which just infuriated me.  Something like, "we're not in with the coaches, we aren't evaluating players based on scheme."  And that seemed like the absolute stupidest thing I had ever heard in my life.  If you're NOT evaluating how a player would fit in YOUR organization, then what in the Sam Hill are you actually doing?  It speaks to the divide between the personnel and the coaching staff, and most likely Bruce trying to keep things separate.  

 

 

Yeah Doug said they don't factor scheme in their signings and that's up for the coaches to figure out how to make it work.    Rivera/Kyle recently said the opposite of that.  they want players who fit their scheme and what they want to do.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Yeah Doug said they don't factor scheme in their signings and that's up for the coaches to figure out how to make it work.    Rivera/Kyle recently said the opposite of that.  they want players who fit their scheme and what they want to do.

Yeah, this was the stupidest damn thing.  It's how you end up with mis-matched pieces and no actual plan about how to use them.  When I heard that, I just about fell out of my chair.

 

Even Scot McLoughan said that he would spend time with the coaches so he would know what kind of players to target.

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Shanny was somewhat the defacto GM but supposedly was overruled from time to time. 

Shanny had final personnel say, in theory.  I think the only person who could REALLY overrule Shanny was Dan.  It could be Dan at the behest of Bruce, but Bruce couldn't overrule Shanny by himself.  

 

Though, I think mostly Bruce and Dan left Shanny alone, except with the QB position.  Where Dan wanted McNabb.  If I remember correctly Shanahan wanted Bulger, I think.  As it turns out, both were probably bad pickups, but the Bulger one would have been cheaper as he was a FA.  

 

I don't think Bruce cared beansall about most of the other positions on the field.  The irony is when he was officially in charge of everything, he mishandled the Cousins situation so badly it set the team back years.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

 

Though, I think mostly Bruce and Dan left Shanny alone, except with the QB position.  Where Dan wanted McNabb.  If I remember correctly Shanahan wanted Bulger, I think.  As it turns out, both were probably bad pickups, but the Bulger one would have been cheaper as he was a FA.  

 

I don't think Bruce cared beansall about most of the other positions on the field.  The irony is when he was officially in charge of everything, he mishandled the Cousins situation so badly it set the team back years.  

 

From what some have said, Bruce laid off the draft except on occasion the first round, tie breaker for Payne and helped Dan push Haskins but otherwise very little.

 

He was though the orchestrator from what many have said about trades and what players to let go and occasionally dabbled in FA. 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

@thesubmittedone Bill O'Brien is making the case that a coach should never again be the GM. 

 

 

 

I disagree.

 

I think O'Brien is making the case that coaches/GMs should be subject to routine drug tests.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I disagree.

 

I think O'Brien is making the case that coaches/GMs should be subject to routine drug tests.

I mean, in today’s environment im

all for testing of any kind...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2020 at 12:09 PM, Voice_of_Reason said:

@thesubmittedone Bill O'Brien is making the case that a coach should never again be the GM. 

 

 


Why thank you, kind sir, for recognizing this. :) 


I’ve actually referred to the Texans as a good case study for my positions in multiple posts both recently and previously. Thus far, seeing what O’Brien has done since Rick Smith left has only provided further evidence to my thoughts regarding the issues with giving a coach final say over player personnel within the organization. 
 

Some of the more recent posts where I brought him up:

 

Quote

Like I already mentioned, Texans are a newer example because Rick Smith left due to his wife being diagnosed with cancer and not one of “sustained success”. We’ll see how that goes, but are you okay with what Bill O’Brien has done since last offseason? Those trades were ridiculous, in my mind. I think Texan fans agree. 

https://es.redskins.com/topic/431723-welcome-to-the-redskins-ron-rivera-head-coach/?do=findComment&comment=11703265

 

Quote

It’s pretty damn concerning right now. This could quickly go the way of Bill O’Brien and the Texans, trading a crazy amount of draft picks and quality player personnel overnight to take a short cut to the detriment of their future once he took the reins. 
 

 

https://es.redskins.com/topic/431652-ron-rivera-to-be-next-redskins-hc-according-to-csn-post-game-show/?do=findComment&comment=11684445

 

Those were made only months ago. And now we get to add the Hopkins trade to it. :ols: 

 

We’ll see how it goes for him, but my prediction was that the collapse was inevitable once the Texans announced O’Brien was assuming all of Rick Smith’s GM responsibilities. Fascinating to watch, either way. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thesubmittedone said:

Why thank you, kind sir, for recognizing this. :) 

Hey, we might not agree on everything, but damn, if there wasn't a case to prove your point, this was it. I might finally be convinced. I know you had mentioned the Bill before.

 

I haven't done a lot of research on the Texans, do they even have equivalents to Kyle Smith and Rob Rodgers, the contract guy?  In our world, even if Ron is the final decision maker (for now), at least he has a personnel guy and a contract guy who he seems to trust who can tell him he's completely off his rocker and try and convince him not to make stupid decisions.  And Ron seems like the type to listen.  O'Brien seems like Chip Kelly.  He's not going to listen to anybody and he's going to shoot from the hip.  

 

And after seeing what has gone down in the past couple of days, I'm more convinced than ever that Kyle, in conjunction with Rob Rodgers, are playing an extremely key role in personnel.  If they weren't, we might have re-set the market by 10-15% to get Amari Cooper and/or Austin Hooper. And Dan isn't.  If this was the Dan/Vinny years, they would have made Cooper/Hooper offers they absolutely couldn't refuse.  And then we would have been saddle in cap hell for years.  

 

It's like there is nobody in Houston who's there to save O'Brien from himself.  Which is, candidly, hysterical.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Hey, we might not agree on everything, but damn, if there wasn't a case to prove your point, this was it. I might finally be convinced. I know you had mentioned the Bill before.

 

I haven't done a lot of research on the Texans, do they even have equivalents to Kyle Smith and Rob Rodgers, the contract guy?  In our world, even if Ron is the final decision maker (for now), at least he has a personnel guy and a contract guy who he seems to trust who can tell him he's completely off his rocker and try and convince him not to make stupid decisions.  And Ron seems like the type to listen.  O'Brien seems like Chip Kelly.  He's not going to listen to anybody and he's going to shoot from the hip.  

 

And after seeing what has gone down in the past couple of days, I'm more convinced than ever that Kyle, in conjunction with Rob Rodgers, are playing an extremely key role in personnel.  If they weren't, we might have re-set the market by 10-15% to get Amari Cooper and/or Austin Hooper. And Dan isn't.  If this was the Dan/Vinny years, they would have made Cooper/Hooper offers they absolutely couldn't refuse.  And then we would have been saddle in cap hell for years.  

 

It's like there is nobody in Houston who's there to save O'Brien from himself.  Which is, candidly, hysterical.  


No, I don’t think he has someone like a Kyle Smith. Matt Bazirgan is their Director of Player Personnel, but his resumé is meh and he joined them pretty recently in May 2018. He was with the Jets before that for a long time serving in a variety of roles. 
 

But to make it even worse, he’s not only got O’Brien to answer to, but Jack Easterby is the EVP of Football Operations (essentially Bill’s right hand man), and these are his qualifications: 

 

Quote

Easterby came to Houston after serving as team development director/character coach for the New England Patriots from 2013-18, where he was a part of winning Super Bowls XLIV, LI and LII. He was also the team chaplain for the Kansas City Chiefs from 2011-12.


Lol. 
 

So, I agree with you, we’re definitely set up better than the Texans, no question about it. I never disputed anything you’re saying in this post and think we agree 100% in terms of this being a better set up than we’ve ever had. 
 

Still, this is why the level of concern I have is absolutely warranted (O’Brien is just the latest example of what often happens, and your comparison with Chip Kelly is certainly apt) and why I’m still holding on to the hope that we get that final step taken after the draft where Kyle (or whoever is qualified enough) gets promoted to GM with final say over the roster. Notice how, even here with Matt Bazirgan, the hire was made in May after the draft. So there’s still hope on that front as these type of moves are made after the draft often, even if it may be a minimal chance Ron gives up his power. 
 

But that’ll be most conducive to success and immediately remove any level of skepticism I have. I won’t need to justify having unbridled optimism via hope because it’d be totally rational (and that’s okay if people want to go the “hope route”, it’s just Dan has beat it out of me at this point). And even if they failed, I’d still be satisfied because they tried their best and set it up in the best way. Sometimes you do everything right and the results don’t follow, it happens. Just persist with the right method, try again, and usually it pans out. 
 

Quote

In our world, even if Ron is the final decision maker (for now), at least he has a personnel guy and a contract guy who he seems to trust who can tell him he's completely off his rocker and try and convince him not to make stupid decisions.  And Ron seems like the type to listen.  O'Brien seems like Chip Kelly.  He's not going to listen to anybody and he's going to shoot from the hip.  

 

And after seeing what has gone down in the past couple of days, I'm more convinced than ever that Kyle, in conjunction with Rob Rodgers, are playing an extremely key role in personnel.  If they weren't, we might have re-set the market by 10-15% to get Amari Cooper and/or Austin Hooper. And Dan isn't.  If this was the Dan/Vinny years, they would have made Cooper/Hooper offers they absolutely couldn't refuse.  And then we would have been saddle in cap hell for years.  


While I’m inclined to agree with this right now considering everything we’ve consumed regarding Ron’s character and style, we do have to keep in mind that there is a very significant element of unknown here we’re operating in when thinking along these lines. 
 

The fact is, we don’t know if there’s any difference between “Ron, the top exec and HC” and “Ron, the HC”. We can’t simply apply who he was in the latter role (which he occupied with the Panthers his entire tenure) and assume he’ll be exactly the same here. We can hope for it and even suggest that he will be as a man of principle, but there’s no empirical evidence for it. That’s not the be all end all, of course, but it’s significant in terms of understanding why a healthy level of skepticism is warranted. 
 

Absolute power corrupts absolutely and all. Not to mention the other pitfalls that occur with the emotionalism of coaching, short-sightedness, a lack of resource management skills, etc... It just happens far too often to dismiss, unfortunately. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:


No, I don’t think he has someone like a Kyle Smith. Matt Bazirgan is their Director of Player Personnel, but his resumé is meh and he joined them pretty recently in May 2018. He was with the Jets before that for a long time serving in a variety of roles.

(edited for length)

So the short answer is "no." O'Brien has really nobody to lean on that can tell him he's about to be roasted for being stupid.  That's stupid on steroids.  

 

I'd submit even a competent GM should have people around them to stop them from being stupid.  It's not like we haven't seen qualified GMs make extraordinarily bad picks and trades. If you don't have people surrounding you with differing opinions, you have a bunch of yes-men and an echo-chamber, and you can talk yourself into just about anything.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

While I’m inclined to agree with this right now considering everything we’ve consumed regarding Ron’s character and style, we do have to keep in mind that there is a very significant element of unknown here we’re operating in when thinking along these lines. 

 

(Sorry, being stuck at a home with a 6 year old daughter, this was inevitable) 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

The fact is, we don’t know if there’s any difference between “Ron, the top exec and HC” and “Ron, the HC”. We can’t simply apply who he was in the latter role (which he occupied with the Panthers his entire tenure) and assume he’ll be exactly the same here. We can hope for it and even suggest that he will be as a man of principle, but there’s no empirical evidence for it. That’s not the be all end all, of course, but it’s significant in terms of understanding why a healthy level of skepticism is warranted. 

You're 100% right, we have no idea.  I would also add we have no idea how well Kyle would do as a GM.  Both would be being put in jobs they have never done before, and it's just as possible Kyle with the full responsibilities of a GM would fail, even though he's seems like an outstanding scout.  And it's possible Ron the top exec will fail Ron the coach.  We've seen it over and over.  

 

I bring this up all the time, it's the Peter Principal, which says people will rise to their level of incompetence.  Take somebody who's really good at one thing, give them more responsibility, and see if they're good at something else. Ron is a really good coach, but we have no idea if he's a good, for lack of better term, CEO.  Just like we know Kyle is a good director of college scouting, which he was until Ron promoted him earlier this year, but we don't know if he'll make a good GM.

 

Personally, I like the way they are bringing Kyle along, giving him more responsibility in small pieces so he doesn't have to get all the responsibility all at once.  That's a personal preference thing for me.  And if it works out well, if they choose not to promote him this year, and wait for next year, that's fine with me to.  In my line of business, I like to see people operate at the level they are being promoted to for about a year, and then the promotion is kindof a formality.  Is football the exact same?  No, but I think in this instance, there is some correlation.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Absolute power corrupts absolutely and all. Not to mention the other pitfalls that occur with the emotionalism of coaching, short-sightedness, a lack of resource management skills, etc... It just happens far too often to dismiss, unfortunately. 

Yeah, I agree, which is why I like checks and balances no matter what, which is also why I don't like the coach reporting to the GM.  I really like the coach and GM reporting to somebody else.  There have been examples of GMs screwing up organizations as well as coaches screwing up organizations.  Heck, until Bill O'Brien made him look like a genius, the fool in Arizona, who's been the GM there, has been laughed at for ages because he seems like an incompetent nincompoop. 

 

However, what seems to be true for the Redskins is that this setup seems to work well right now.  Ron's the CEO and HC, for lack of better term.  He seems like he's essentially delegated roster authority to Kyle Smith, with input from Rob Rodgers.  I doubt very much Ron is the guy who's setting the financial contractual limits for guys.  That's not his bag, and he seems self aware enough to understand that.  

 

So while Ron is at the top of the org chart, he seems to have given the authority to Kyle and Rob they deserve, and is letting them do their thing.  Which, is fine.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

You're 100% right, we have no idea.  I would also add we have no idea how well Kyle would do as a GM.  Both would be being put in jobs they have never done before, and it's just as possible Kyle with the full responsibilities of a GM would fail, even though he's seems like an outstanding scout.  And it's possible Ron the top exec will fail Ron the coach.  We've seen it over and over.  


Slight nitpick here. I don’t think you can simply say “both would be put in jobs they have never done before”, and leave it at that. The difference is Kyle has been operating in a role directly related to the responsibilities of running player personnel that comes with a GM title, whereas Ron hasn’t. There is way too much evidence showing that coaches simply aren’t equals in terms of talent acquisition/resource management and scouting than actual player personnel execs/scouts. So one would definitely be more prepared for that role over the other, which is why it’s important to recognize the issue here with having Ron as essentially the GM since he has final say over player personnel. 
 

9 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:


Yeah, I agree, which is why I like checks and balances no matter what, which is also why I don't like the coach reporting to the GM.  I really like the coach and GM reporting to somebody else.  There have been examples of GMs screwing up organizations as well as coaches screwing up organizations.  Heck, until Bill O'Brien made him look like a genius, the fool in Arizona, who's been the GM there, has been laughed at for ages because he seems like an incompetent nincompoop. 


Herein lies the rub. One way has failed at a higher rate than the other. That’s the key. So, yes, both ways fail, but one much, much more consistently. Heck, we can say it pretty much fails every time in the modern NFL except in a couple exceptional situations. Which is why the vast majority of the NFL has went the direction of having a GM or EVP of Player Personnel with final say over the roster alongside a HC. There’s good reason for it. We can’t just say “it fails both ways” like it’s that simple. 
 

I think I’m with you regarding the GM and HC both reporting to someone else. I do like that approach, and in fact, that (along with having the HC heavily involved in hiring the GM initially) is what is meant by “a coach-centric approach” by the other teams recently mentioned that often gets misconstrued as the HC having final say over player personnel and/or being the top exec. We, on the other hand, have taken that “coach-centric” theme and went all the way with it, which is why I assume Ron called it “unique” in his first presser. My hope is that it does change and we end up with the version of it understood by the Bills, Niners, and Chiefs. 
 

If not, it’s concerning and a legit issue, even though it’s better than anything we’ve had under Dan. 
 

9 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

However, what seems to be true for the Redskins is that this setup seems to work well right now.  Ron's the CEO and HC, for lack of better term.  He seems like he's essentially delegated roster authority to Kyle Smith, with input from Rob Rodgers.  I doubt very much Ron is the guy who's setting the financial contractual limits for guys.  That's not his bag, and he seems self aware enough to understand that.  

 

So while Ron is at the top of the org chart, he seems to have given the authority to Kyle and Rob they deserve, and is letting them do their thing.  Which, is fine.  


I bolded every time you said “seems”. That’s the problem right there. How often has the word “seems” and initial appearances completely fooled us as Skins fans? Yeah, I’m not going to just go with that. And if it is as it seems, then I’m left wondering why that’s not just formalized within the structure itself? It is important that we get away from “seems” and have these processes formalized within the structure itself so there’s no question about it and we’re not left wondering if things actually are as they seem, only to have it blow up in the ugliest of manners.
 

As it stands, you can say it seems a certain way all you want, but Ron is still the GM officially as he has final say over player personnel. It is what it is. Any player personnel acquisition that fails (or succeeds for that matter), whether he “seemingly” delegated it to Kyle or not, is still on him. There’s a reason why Kyle said he still wants to be GM recently. There is a difference that he recognizes himself. It certainly suggests that, at the very least, it’s not as simple as your description of how it “seems“ is. 
 

Again, I agree that this set up is the best we’ve had under Dan (mostly because of the who, not necessarily structurally), and I might even be inclined to agree with you about how it seems thus far... but that isn’t saying much, unfortunately. It still presents a myriad of issues when compared to the rest of the league and what we’ve seen fail at a much higher rate. 😕 
 

If things remain as is, and they are as they “seem”, then we can hope we have the same sustainable success the Seahawks have had with that set up. They’d literally be the only exception to the rule regarding this set up that would be comparable to us, where even though the HC is the top exec and has final say over the roster, John Schneider is still largely the architect of the team and the HC allows him to fulfill that role as GM. It’s a weird setup really in that, by all accounts, they might as well give that power to Schneider since he does wield it during the off-season (Carroll controls the 53 during the season)... but, hey, it works. Ron would be our Carroll and Kyle would be our Schneider. Could happen. 
 

It’s just unfortunate we’d have one exception in the entire NFL we’d be hoping we can emulate instead of the many others. It’s willingly choosing to go the unlikelier route over the likelier one. 

Edited by thesubmittedone
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

Slight nitpick here. I don’t think you can simply say “both would be put in jobs they have never done before”, and leave it at that. The difference is Kyle has been operating in a role directly related to the responsibilities of running player personnel that comes with a GM title, whereas Ron hasn’t. There is way too much evidence showing that coaches simply aren’t equals in terms of talent acquisition/resource management and scouting than actual player personnel execs/scouts. So one would definitely be more prepared for that role over the other, which is why it’s important to recognize the issue here with having Ron as essentially the GM since he has final say over player personnel. 

So, here's the thing. I don't think Ron is actually doing anything different with roster management than he has in the past.  What Kyle said in his pre-combine presser can be summarized in 3 areas:

 

- The coaching staff and Kyle all did homework prior to that infamous February 12th date on players on the roster so they could come up with their core players.  Ron and Kyle took the input from the coaches and pro-personnel scouts, met, and decided who the core was. Based on that, they released Norman and a few others.  

- Kyle was told to run the draft however he wanted to.  He made some changes (added a color coding, and some other nerdy football things), and the scouts are feeding him information, and then he's having the coaches put grades on players they identify as the ones they want to go after. Kyle and his staff set the board based on this, and then he and Ron finalize the board and the trade possibilities, etc.  (My comment: regardless of who has final say, this is how it should work.)

- For Free Agency, the board was set, then Kyle and Ron got together to finalize the decisions.  I assume Rob Rodgers was included there to some extent as far as contracts and cap are concerned.

 

I'm working under the assumption, because there is no reporting to say otherwise, that this is basically how Ron worked in Carolina.  The only difference is if there is a disagreement, he gets to make the final determination.

 

I think the big job-description change for Ron is less on the personnel side and more that he now is responsible for EVERYTHING.  That's tough, and I'm not sure it's going to work, to be honest.  But the reason I think it won't work has less to do with Ron's ability to manage the roster, and more to do with the fact he might be spread so thin that he can't actually be a good HC.

 

Right now, here is the org chart:

 

Dan -> Ron

Ron -> Del Rio/Turner (Coaching staff) -> Coaching Staff

Ron -> Kyle Smith (Personnel/Roster management) -> Scouting Department

Ron -> Rob Rodgers (Contracts/Cap)

Ron -> Ryan Vermillion (Training/Medical)

Ron -> Doug Williams (Player Development)

 

And that doesn't include the fact he's on the competition committee, and has other executive duties as well.  And, most importantly, he has to manage Dan.  

 

That's just a ton of responsibility for one guy to have.  Which is why I think he's basically delegated the majority of the roster stuff to Kyle, regardless of final say.  I also think it's why you see a lot of GM/Coach split responsibilities across the league because it allows the coach to coach, and not to be essentially the CEO of the organization.  

 

Kyle, on the other hand, was Director of College Scouting 2 months ago.  Going from that to GM is a huge leap with significant added responsibilities even above and beyond final say on the roster.  And while it's true Kyle has been doing a job which is on the career path to GM, being a GM is more than just roster management, and I am willing to bet Bruce kept a lot of those other responsibilities close to the vest, and Kyle wasn't really exposed to them.  This is also based on reporting from Kiem, Finlay, and a bunch of others.  So, while it's possible if not likely Kyle will succeed as a GM, it's not known.  It's also not a bad idea to bring him along slowly.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

Herein lies the rub. One way has failed at a higher rate than the other. That’s the key. So, yes, both ways fail, but one much, much more consistently. Heck, we can say it pretty much fails every time in the modern NFL except in a couple exceptional situations. Which is why the vast majority of the NFL has went the direction of having a GM or EVP of Player Personnel with final say over the roster alongside a HC. There’s good reason for it. We can’t just say “it fails both ways” like it’s that simple. 

Yeah, again, I don't disagree.  However, I also think you have to look at each situation separately, and you can't evaluate every franchise the same way.

 

If somebody ignores Dan's presence in this organization, they do so at their own peril. The key to success, in my opinion, really has less to do with what happens below Dan than managing Dan. 

 

Let's assume for a second there isn't a football exec brought in above Ron.  Because I can't see that happening.  

 

If you promote Kyle to GM and give him full roster authority, then by definition you have to make him a Dan direct report. I don't think you can do that and have him report to Ron, or else you haven't accomplished anything.  And in conjunction with that, you probably need to move Rob Rodgers under Kyle, as you don't want your contracts/cap person working for the HC, and the GM working for the owner. Unless you also make Rob Rodgers a direct Dan report. Which I don't think is a great idea either.  

 

So, if you take that approach, you have opened more obvious avenues for Dan to be a problem.  And however strong a personality Kyle is, he's still in his 30's, trying to make a name for himself, and having him report directly to Dan scares the bejesus out of me.  

 

In THIS organization, the mountain of evidence is whatever FO person Dan has hired has become his stooge, and things have gone badly.  Because we end up with FO vs. Coaching, and the owner in position to make a lot of bad decisions.

 

I get that the owner is always going to have a way to be a problem, really no matter the structure.  However, if you can mitigate that by essentially forcing him to go through Ron by his own decision to have a "coach centric approach," you can assume if Dan wants to meddle, he's going to go directly to Ron to meddle. And then Ron can deal with it without it causing a fission in the organization. That also keeps Dan out of Kyle's hair.  

 

For this reason, I don't really want anybody other than Ron handling Dan.  I think Ron can handle it. I don't know this, but I just feel he can.  I think he knows what he's doing, and he can both be stern when necessary, defer when necessary, placate the ego, etc.  

 

Now, this puts A HUGE amount of pressure on Ron.  And it's more than possible he is not going to be able to deal with it.  But, he's in the best position to do it.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

I think I’m with you regarding the GM and HC both reporting to someone else. I do like that approach, and in fact, that (along with having the HC heavily involved in hiring the GM initially) is what is meant by “a coach-centric approach” by the other teams recently mentioned that often gets misconstrued as the HC having final say over player personnel and/or being the top exec. We, on the other hand, have taken that “coach-centric” theme and went all the way with it, which is why I assume Ron called it “unique” in his first presser. My hope is that it does change and we end up with the version of it understood by the Bills, Niners, and Chiefs. 

Again, you have to weigh the benefits of having a situation where the GM has final roster control against the situation where the GM is reporting to Dan.  As I've said, in THIS organization, I'm not sure I want a FO person as Dan's right hand person, because that has always gone badly.  I'd prefer to put trust in Ron to manage Dan, and then delegate appropriately for roster management.  

 

Let me put it another way: I think Dan is more of a risk to roster building than Ron.  And we have 20 years of evidence to support that theory.  So, if I have to choose which of the two risks I'm going to mitigate, I'm going to mitigate the Dan risk first.  And if that means limiting his direct reports to 1, and trusting Ron to delegate roster authority and not go full Bill O'Brien, I'm ok with that.  

 

I would not be in favor of that in other organizations, where ownership is less of a problem.  The Chiefs can do what they do because ownership isn't a real problem.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

I bolded every time you said “seems”. That’s the problem right there. How often has the word “seems” and initial appearances completely fooled us as Skins fans? Yeah, I’m not going to just go with that. And if it is as it seems, then I’m left wondering why that’s not just formalized within the structure itself? It is important that we get away from “seems” and have these processes formalized within the structure itself so there’s no question about it and we’re not left wondering if things actually are as they seem, only to have it blow up in the ugliest of manners.

I hear you, however when I say "it seems" I am basically saying this is what has been reported or stated by somebody.  They can always lie.  And they have in the past.  I've given you the reason why I think it might be a mistake to formalize the structure above.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

As it stands, you can say it seems a certain way all you want, but Ron is still the GM officially as he has final say over player personnel. It is what it is. Any player personnel acquisition that fails (or succeeds for that matter), whether he “seemingly” delegated it to Kyle or not, is still on him. There’s a reason why Kyle said he still wants to be GM recently. There is a difference that he recognizes himself. It certainly suggests that, at the very least, it’s not as simple as your description of how it “seems“ is. 

Oh, without question, this is the Ron Rivera show no matter what.  Because even if he trusts Kyle implicitly and follows exactly what he suggests, if it fails, it's Ron's responsibility because he is in charge.  

 

I disagree though with your bolded statement.  I listed to where he talked about this during his combine press conference,  and the context of the question and the answer was more of whether he would like to be GM (the question was too quiet to transcribe word for word), and he said (this is an exact quote) "If you're a scout, and you get into this league, as a scout, your ultimate goal is to be a GM. It's no different than a coach who's a quality control, your goal is to be a head coach.  That is the ultimate goal, but right now I've got a tremendous responsibility and opportunity in my role as it is now, and I plan on attacking that.  [...] If that opportunity comes as a GM, it comes.  If it doesn't, it doesn't.  I am not worried about that." (14:45 of the Combine presser.  I had to transcribe myself because I couldn't find a transcript.)  I am not sure if you're referring to a different interview, but in this one, the question was more aspirational, and he was pretty clear he said he would like to be GM, but also wasn't that bothered about it.  

 

Additionally, he was directly asked by Finlay "It's a short sample, but how are things running?" and he immediately said "I love the way things are running, they're very smooth." (9:25 mark in the combine presser).  He went on to say Rivera had "taken a step back" and basically was letting him run his department how he wanted to.  The "taken a step back" is interesting.  I think it implies that Bruce DIDN'T take a step back.  And interfered with what was going on in the personnel department. 

 

So, unless I'm missing something, or there is another interview with Kyle I haven't heard, in context, I think he's fine with his role, wants the GM title because it's something all scouts aspire to, but is comfortable in the role he has and is going to attack it.  (There was a whole bunch in there about putting a chip on your shoulder, etc. that I didn't transcribe because I didn't feel like typing all of it out.) 

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

Again, I agree that this set up is the best we’ve had under Dan (mostly because of the who, not necessarily structurally), and I might even be inclined to agree with you about how it seems thus far... but that isn’t saying much, unfortunately. It still presents a myriad of issues when compared to the rest of the league and what we’ve seen fail at a much higher rate. 😕 

I guess i look at this through a very specific Redskins Organization lens, and not a league lens.  There's no question it might still fail.  But I'm less inclined to care about what might work in Arizona, San Fran and Kansas City and more of what might work here.  And here we have a specific problem in Dan, and the Chiefs situation where the GM and Coach report to the owner might just not practically work here.  And the evidence is it won't.  At one point, Shanahan and Bruce both worked for Dan.  And that went sideways very quickly.  

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly though, the "who" is the best we've had as a collective group since Dan bought the team, with the possible exception of the Marty year.  If you look at the combos, they are either terrible from top-to-bottom, or have a significant issue:

1999/2000 - Dan/Vinny/Norv

2001 - Marty/John Schneider (This was pretty damn good)

2002/2003 - Dan/Vinny/Spurrier (barf)

2004-2007 - Gibbs with a personnel assist from Vinny and Dad.  If Gibbs had a competent personnel guy, these 4 years would have been much better.

2008-2009 - Vinny/Zorn, possibly the low point

2010-2013: Mike Shanahan/Bruce.  It's still not clear exactly WHAT Bruce did, except for get in the way

2014-2019: Bruce called the shots on just about everything.  But at least he had Kyle and some other good folks running the draft. 

 

Ron/Kyle is better than all of those combos.  Ron isn't the coach Gibbs is, but he won't be anchored by a buffoon like VInny.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

If things remain as is, and they are as they “seem”, then we can hope we have the same sustainable success the Seahawks have had with that set up. They’d literally be the only exception to the rule regarding this set up that would be comparable to us, where even though the HC is the top exec and has final say over the roster, John Schneider is still largely the architect of the team and the HC allows him to fulfill that role as GM. It’s a weird setup really in that, by all accounts, they might as well give that power to Schneider since he does wield it during the off-season (Carroll controls the 53 during the season)... but, hey, it works. Ron would be our Carroll and Kyle would be our Schneider. Could happen. 

It could.  Serious question: why do you think the Seahawks haven't given Schneider the official authority?  Serious question.  I don't know, except that if everybody is comfortable with the way it works, there's no real reason to change it.  

 

5 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

It’s just unfortunate we’d have one exception in the entire NFL we’d be hoping we can emulate instead of the many others. It’s willingly choosing to go the unlikelier route over the likelier one. 

And again, I'll say, we also are somewhat exceptional in that our owner has been a complete disaster for 20 years, and more than following a structure that works for other teams, we need a structure, and more importantly, people, who will work here, under these circumstances.

 

I'm just not one of those who throw their hands up in the air and say, "we'll never win with Dan."  But I also think the standard setup might just not work here.  We might have to do something different, and essentially hit an inside straight, in who we hire and how they are able to handle Dan.  

 

What started this exchange was my statement "Bill O'Brien is proving no HC should be the GM."  I REALLY believe that.  And you might say I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth.  But I'm really not.  I think Kyle will have roster authority, but our situation might just look a lot like the Seahawks.  What that depends on is Ron basically allowing Kyle and the scouting department to do the roster construction, and not "interfere." I really like the coaches and scouts working together, which is what they are doing now, based on what Ron and Kyle have been saying.  

 

So, even though Ron might have complete authority, he won't be "Bill O'Brien-ing" and making all the decisions on his own.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good stuff but my tiny brain is struggling to keep up :ols:

 

This is what happens when novelists engage in a debate on organizational architecture. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KDawg said:

This is good stuff but my tiny brain is struggling to keep up :ols:

 

This is what happens when novelists engage in a debate on organizational architecture. 

 

31 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

i was gonna say all that stuff

Are you saying I’m long winded?  

 

Because if so... you’re damn right.  :P 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

So, here's the thing. I don't think Ron is actually doing anything different with roster management than he has in the past.  What Kyle said in his pre-combine presser can be summarized in 3 areas:

 

- The coaching staff and Kyle all did homework prior to that infamous February 12th date on players on the roster so they could come up with their core players.  Ron and Kyle took the input from the coaches and pro-personnel scouts, met, and decided who the core was. Based on that, they released Norman and a few others.  

- Kyle was told to run the draft however he wanted to.  He made some changes (added a color coding, and some other nerdy football things), and the scouts are feeding him information, and then he's having the coaches put grades on players they identify as the ones they want to go after. Kyle and his staff set the board based on this, and then he and Ron finalize the board and the trade possibilities, etc.  (My comment: regardless of who has final say, this is how it should work.)

- For Free Agency, the board was set, then Kyle and Ron got together to finalize the decisions.  I assume Rob Rodgers was included there to some extent as far as contracts and cap are concerned.

 

I'm working under the assumption, because there is no reporting to say otherwise, that this is basically how Ron worked in Carolina.  The only difference is if there is a disagreement, he gets to make the final determination.


You do see the massive, fundamental contradiction in the above that I bolded, right? 
 

It’s almost like we’re back to square one. After all that stroking of my ego you just did! :ols: 😛 

 

Seriously, though, nothing you said here changes what I’ve previously said, never mind the fact that I’ve mentioned multiple times that this set up is better than what we’ve ever had so I really don’t need an explanation of it. I get it, I promise. Describing Kyle and Ron’s cooperation and/or collaboration doesn’t change this. Furthermore, that’s not much different than anywhere else for that matter in terms of “working together”. Everyone does that no matter the set up, that intention is always there, at least initially. It has to be. 

 

Again, what I’ve been pointing to is the setup that has proven to work best more times than the other with regards to this collaborative effort. I feel like this seems to keep going right over your head, or you’re just unwilling to accept the evidence I continue to present about it. 
 

Where we’ll seemingly forever disagree is your continual downplaying of the importance of final say and the structure the vast majority of the NFL has recognized is the best formalization of sound processes to “collaborate properly” and build a contender. 
 

You can’t say “the only difference” like it’s some slight shift for Ron or just some side note. It is not. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:


I think the big job-description change for Ron is less on the personnel side and more that he now is responsible for EVERYTHING.  That's tough, and I'm not sure it's going to work, to be honest.  But the reason I think it won't work has less to do with Ron's ability to manage the roster, and more to do with the fact he might be spread so thin that he can't actually be a good HC.

 

Right now, here is the org chart:

 

Dan -> Ron

Ron -> Del Rio/Turner (Coaching staff) -> Coaching Staff

Ron -> Kyle Smith (Personnel/Roster management) -> Scouting Department

Ron -> Rob Rodgers (Contracts/Cap)

Ron -> Ryan Vermillion (Training/Medical)

Ron -> Doug Williams (Player Development)

 

And that doesn't include the fact he's on the competition committee, and has other executive duties as well.  And, most importantly, he has to manage Dan.  

 

That's just a ton of responsibility for one guy to have.  Which is why I think he's basically delegated the majority of the roster stuff to Kyle, regardless of final say.  I also think it's why you see a lot of GM/Coach split responsibilities across the league because it allows the coach to coach, and not to be essentially the CEO of the organization.  


Yes, totally, and this is essentially ad verbatim of what I had said after Ron’s initial presser. Final say is a big part of that, however, whether you want to insist on removing it from his “job-description change” or not. 
 

It’s a lot on one man’s plate and one of the major reasons why this type of set up fails at a higher rate than the other. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

Kyle, on the other hand, was Director of College Scouting 2 months ago.  Going from that to GM is a huge leap with significant added responsibilities even above and beyond final say on the roster.  And while it's true Kyle has been doing a job which is on the career path to GM, being a GM is more than just roster management, and I am willing to bet Bruce kept a lot of those other responsibilities close to the vest, and Kyle wasn't really exposed to them.  This is also based on reporting from Kiem, Finlay, and a bunch of others.  So, while it's possible if not likely Kyle will succeed as a GM, it's not known.  It's also not a bad idea to bring him along slowly.  


 

The bolded above is overstated. It’s not a “huge leap”, though it’s a significant one, and it’s certainly happened in the NFL before with success. And it’s still a more valid and sensical career trajectory than coming from the coaching ranks into player personnel.
 

That being said, I do agree in that I don’t mind this being sort of a trial period for Kyle and have said as much. Let him get a feel for being involved in everything and not just college scouting (though that skill translates quite easily and seamlessly to pro scouting more than the other way around just because there’s way more projecting involved at the college level). Resource managing at a high enough level isn’t easy and does need to be experienced to some degree, so that’s where the biggest leap would be taken. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

Yeah, again, I don't disagree.  However, I also think you have to look at each situation separately, and you can't evaluate every franchise the same way.

 

If somebody ignores Dan's presence in this organization, they do so at their own peril. The key to success, in my opinion, really has less to do with what happens below Dan than managing Dan. 


Well, if you’re not going to give @Skinsinparadise credit for almost everything you say here regarding Dan relative to this setup, I will. You’re essentially piggybacking off of the valid points he’s made regarding this. That’s ok, but give credit where it’s due. ;) 😛 
 

So, like I’ve already explained to SIP, I agree that the Dan factor does muddy this all up, and I can acknowledge that it’s quite possible this setup might be best for him... however, it’s a bit of a leap to assume that right now. 
 

We simply don’t have enough evidence to assume that “who Dan is” has to do with him “siding” with the GM. What we do know is he’s had incompetent, unqualified people operating at that level virtually his entire tenure and so they’ve been an issue regardless of any title, position, or because they weren’t coaches. 
 

We simply haven’t seen a set up with both a qualified coach and GM working with each other with the latter either equal in rank or above. Not once. Maybe briefly with Scot, but then he had his own personal issues that ruined it. Again, like I told SIP, I think we have to see that happen at least once for a legitimate period of time before we decide it simply wouldn’t work with Dan. The problem could easily be solely due to the incompetence of the hires Dan has made there versus some affinity he has towards the position that brings the worst out of him. 
 

If anyone would like to understand more on this, and really it’s a direct refutation of anything VOR is mentioning here regarding Dan, then they can just look at the last exchange SIP and I had on the matter starting towards the bottom of the previous page and ending at the top of this page. 
 

SIP understood totally where I was coming from and, from what I can tell, recognized my position as just as valid as his, so I’m hoping you do as well since you’re mostly repeating what he said. 
 

For quick reference and so as to

help avoid forcing anyone to sift through it, here’s the last thing I said and what SIP understood fully: 

 

Quote

Yeah, I mean we’re on the same wavelength here, it’s just I’d like to see someone legit in that role with the power it’s supposed to have before I can be sure that Dan‘s worst habits would still hinder him. I’m not disputing your reading on Dan itself in terms of the problem we have with him and his social issues at all. The nitpick is with the conclusion you get from it in terms of what it means organizationally. 
 

Like, if Kyle Smith isn’t that type to just want to hang out with Dan and be BFFs (and I honestly don’t think any legitimately qualified person for that role would want to be, either), then that’s enough of an answer for me to the Dan problem. At least for now. I just don’t want to accept that this is the only way for Dan, not until I see that actually happen for once. 
 

 ............................ 


What I already said in this post pretty much covers this, but just to make it as clear as possible, I don’t reject any of this regarding your views on Dan. I think it’s pretty much spot on. The only difference is I’d need to first see an actual qualified GM/EVP of Player Personnel with final say over the roster, something we’ve never had under Dan before for any significant period of time, before concluding that it simply won’t work with Dan and the only way is to have a HC with ultimate power. 
 

Basically, that the problem with Dan’s social ineptitude could have more to do with the unqualified people he’s had in that position (which lead to them taking advantage of said social ineptitude by being his BFF to maintain their positions) versus the actual organizational structure having anything to do with it. 
 

Does that make sense? 


 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

Oh, without question, this is the Ron Rivera show no matter what.  Because even if he trusts Kyle implicitly and follows exactly what he suggests, if it fails, it's Ron's responsibility because he is in charge.  

 

I disagree though with your bolded statement.  I listed to where he talked about this during his combine press conference,  and the context of the question and the answer was more of whether he would like to be GM (the question was too quiet to transcribe word for word), and he said (this is an exact quote) "If you're a scout, and you get into this league, as a scout, your ultimate goal is to be a GM. It's no different than a coach who's a quality control, your goal is to be a head coach.  That is the ultimate goal, but right now I've got a tremendous responsibility and opportunity in my role as it is now, and I plan on attacking that.  [...] If that opportunity comes as a GM, it comes.  If it doesn't, it doesn't.  I am not worried about that." (14:45 of the Combine presser.  I had to transcribe myself because I couldn't find a transcript.)  I am not sure if you're referring to a different interview, but in this one, the question was more aspirational, and he was pretty clear he said he would like to be GM, but also wasn't that bothered about it.  

 

Additionally, he was directly asked by Finlay "It's a short sample, but how are things running?" and he immediately said "I love the way things are running, they're very smooth." (9:25 mark in the combine presser).  He went on to say Rivera had "taken a step back" and basically was letting him run his department how he wanted to.  The "taken a step back" is interesting.  I think it implies that Bruce DIDN'T take a step back.  And interfered with what was going on in the personnel department. 

 

So, unless I'm missing something, or there is another interview with Kyle I haven't heard, in context, I think he's fine with his role, wants the GM title because it's something all scouts aspire to, but is comfortable in the role he has and is going to attack it.  (There was a whole bunch in there about putting a chip on your shoulder, etc. that I didn't transcribe because I didn't feel like typing all of it out.) 


This bothers me because I get the sense you’re trying to downplay Kyle’s desire to be GM. This is the disconnect we’re going to continue to have and I don’t think you’re providing any substance as to why you’re disagreeing other than applying your own desire to it. 
 

Now, later on in this post you admitted that:

 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:
Quote

 

I guess i look at this through a very specific Redskins Organization lens, and not a league lens. 


And I think that’s where this entire disconnect is stemming from. I know you directed this comment towards our situation with Dan, but I think you’re often doing it generally and it comes out in a lot of what you say. I’m looking at this as holistically as possible, while you’re being narrow and singular. 
 

So it makes sense why you would interpret Kyle’s response in this way, where you highlight the fact that he’s happy in his role right now while attempting to downplay that he still

wants to be a GM. 
 

What you don’t see is that what you’re highlighting and claiming as some contextualization of his desire to be GM actually does the opposite of what you’re attempting to prove. If it’s just another title that isn’t a big difference from what he’s doing now (here, that’s what is being implied while earlier in this post you contradict that by saying it’s a “huge leap”), then he would’ve said that. He would’ve said something like “nah, it’s not important, what I’m doing now is essentially the same thing”. 

 

He did not. 
 

Everything else he said only highlights that and the context it provides actually supports my argument (not yours) that the title itself along with the final say it entails is super important generally and super important to Kyle himself. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

I guess i look at this through a very specific Redskins Organization lens, and not a league lens.  There's no question it might still fail.  But I'm less inclined to care about what might work in Arizona, San Fran and Kansas City and more of what might work here.  And here we have a specific problem in Dan, and the Chiefs situation where the GM and Coach report to the owner might just not practically work here.  And the evidence is it won't.  At one point, Shanahan and Bruce both worked for Dan.  And that went sideways very quickly.  


This is only evidence of how Dan is with hiring incompetent, unqualified people at that position in the first place. You can’t assume it’d be exactly the same with Dan if someone qualified held that position. With both Bruce and Vinny, they were out of the NFL at the time of their hires and had failed at their previous stints. We simply haven’t seen how it’d look without the likes of them being the top exec or the coach being the top exec (Gibbs, Shanny, and Marty). 
 

If you’re using Dan’s entire tenure as evidence it wouldn’t work, then you’d have to say the same about a coach being the top exec. I wouldn’t do that myself, as it’s only evidence of Dan’s own incompetence, along with his poor hiring process specifically on the player personnel side, that could affect any set up regardless. 
 

Another problem I’m having with our debate/discussion in its entirety is that you’ve got my head spinning with where you actually stand. One second it’s “I agree that having a GM with final say is the best set up” or “If it wasn’t for Dan, it would be the best set up”, the next you’re telling me why the title and final say aren’t really important and why this is, in fact, set up in the best way or that you’re perfectly fine with it as is since it’s all the same, really. I know you’re trying to be nuanced, but it often comes off like you want your cake and to eat it too whether or not it totally contradicts your other positions. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

I agree with you wholeheartedly though, the "who" is the best we've had as a collective group since Dan bought the team, with the possible exception of the Marty year.  If you look at the combos, they are either terrible from top-to-bottom, or have a significant issue:

1999/2000 - Dan/Vinny/Norv

2001 - Marty/John Schneider (This was pretty damn good)

2002/2003 - Dan/Vinny/Spurrier (barf)

2004-2007 - Gibbs with a personnel assist from Vinny and Dad.  If Gibbs had a competent personnel guy, these 4 years would have been much better.

2008-2009 - Vinny/Zorn, possibly the low point

2010-2013: Mike Shanahan/Bruce.  It's still not clear exactly WHAT Bruce did, except for get in the way

2014-2019: Bruce called the shots on just about everything.  But at least he had Kyle and some other good folks running the draft. 

 

Ron/Kyle is better than all of those combos.  Ron isn't the coach Gibbs is, but he won't be anchored by a buffoon like VInny.  


Yup, we’re on the same page here.
 

I just think the disconnect is that you want this to imply it’s fine or as good a set up as we can have with the Redskins, whereas I can’t throw away the mountains of evidence there is showing it’s not and that one final step needs to be taken for it to be the best possible set up, even with the Dan factor. I think the skepticism that I have because of this is not only healthy, but necessary, whereas you’re trying to show why it’s not. 
 

So while, yes, this is the best set up we’ve had because of the “who”, it’s:

 

1) Not saying much because Dan has structured and set up the organization poorly for virtually his entire tenure and;

 

2) Still significantly concerning relative to what has been proven to work best at a higher rate at the pro level. We’re essentially choosing the harder path to success. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

It could.  Serious question: why do you think the Seahawks haven't given Schneider the official authority?  Serious question.  I don't know, except that if everybody is comfortable with the way it works, there's no real reason to change it.


It’s a question I ask myself, honestly, so I don’t know. It’s really the only example in the entire NFL where you have a guy with the GM title who is widely recognized as the architect of the team, essentially has final say during the off-season over the 90, FA and the draft (Carroll has it over the 53 during the season), but yet the HC has the power of “final say” contractually. 


It is a weird ordeal and their formalized structure doesn’t fit the reality of the way they operate, so it’s confusing as to why. It works, though, which is why I pointed to the Seahawks as being our best (and really only) hope to emulate in terms of sustainable success with how they operate using the current structure we have. Still, we’re not exactly set up the same way. Schneider is GM and they’ve openly stated that he runs the show during the off-season with the 90, FA and the draft. We haven’t heard that directly with regards to Kyle, only hints at it. It is, however, what Ron said he wanted before he was hired (just control over the 53 during the season). My concern after the initial presser remains, though, in that there was a change in his speech regarding that. 
 

As to the answer to your question, my best guess is that Schneider doesn’t really care because, in the end, he’s recognized around the league as having that power, anyway. And it looks like Carroll has never used his power over him during the off-season.
 

So it’s the rare exception to the rule. 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

And again, I'll say, we also are somewhat exceptional in that our owner has been a complete disaster for 20 years, and more than following a structure that works for other teams, we need a structure, and more importantly, people, who will work here, under these circumstances.


And, again, I’ll say this is faulty logic because we haven’t seen Dan actually “follow” that structure while having a competent, qualified GM. So we just don’t know whether or not it’ll actually work. We have seen, on the other hand, the “HC as top exec” version fail under Dan, too, so it’s not like that can be automatically assumed as “best for Dan”. We just don’t know and it’s likely Dan’s issues aren’t necessarily tied to that, anyway, and can/will create a problem no matter what. That the only way out is for him to actually learn and improve as an owner. 
 

In fact, I could argue that having a coach and GM equal in rank and equally reporting to him might make it more difficult for him to get too close to one or the other and that it’ll expand his own ability to discern the truth just by virtue of being forced to treat them as equals versus one being over the other. 
 

See how that works? 
 

On 3/22/2020 at 11:58 AM, Voice_of_Reason said:

What started this exchange was my statement "Bill O'Brien is proving no HC should be the GM."  I REALLY believe that.  And you might say I'm talking out of both sides of my mouthBut I'm really not.  I think Kyle will have roster authority, but our situation might just look a lot like the Seahawks.  What that depends on is Ron basically allowing Kyle and the scouting department to do the roster construction, and not "interfere." I really like the coaches and scouts working together, which is what they are doing now, based on what Ron and Kyle have been saying.  

 

So, even though Ron might have complete authority, he won't be "Bill O'Brien-ing" and making all the decisions on his own.  


Well, hey, you said it here, so now I don’t feel bad for saying what I said earlier in this post about my head spinning, lol. 

 

But, yeah, it does come across like that.
 

I hope my explanation above is enough to understand where the issue is with having to hope that we end up like the Seahawks. It’s not a good thing when you’ve got only 1 example out of 32 that you’re forced to hope we can emulate, right? 
 

Like, let’s just keep it recent. Look at the playoff teams this past season:

 

The Vikings have Rick Spielman. 

 

The 49ers have John Lynch. 
 

The Chiefs have Brett Veach. 
 

The Titans have Jon Robinson. 
 

The Bills have Brandon Beane. 
 

The Ravens have Eric DeCosta. 
 

The Saints have Mickey Loomis. 
 

The Eagles have Howie Roseman. 
 

The Packers have Brian Gutekunst. 

 

All of the above have a strong GM coming from a background in evaluating personnel with final say over the roster. 
 

That is 9 out of the 12 playoff teams!
 

The other 3 are the Pats, Texans and Seahawks where the coach is the top football exec. 
 

Now, here’s the thing.

 

The Texans shouldn’t be included because Bill O’Brien took over last off-season for Rick Smith and that team is largely a Rick Smith-built team. We’re seeing Bill pretty much systematically destroy that Smith-built team, as we both agree. Let’s see if he can actually have sustainable success with his own version of them team before we count the Texans as an example of the viability of this set up.  
 

The Seahawks have Schneider with the GM title and he’s actually recognized as the architect of that team around the NFL. 

 

That leaves us with the Pats as the only true exception (in terms our set up “left as is” being sustainably successful) making the playoffs this past year. I’ve got my own arguments against why they shouldn’t be looked at to emulate, as well, but I digress.  
 

Now, one can argue that this is unfair because the percentage of teams with powerful GMs far outweigh the teams without, so you can’t just look at these stats without looking at the ratio... but that doesn’t take into account:

 

1) The amount of failed examples of the “coach as top football exec” set up since the salary cap era started (of which there are plenty) and;

 

2) The fact that there are more set ups with powerful GMs than not is actually a result of the NFL largely recognizing the issues with the “coach as top football exec” set up and not some random occurrence. 
 

So, yeah, we can hope we’re included soon with the Seahawks in this equation shortly (and we’d still need to have someone assume the GM role like Schneider as Kyle isn’t there yet, though he’s close to it), but isn’t it disappointing that that’s what we’re stuck hoping for? Wouldn't you rather be in the same boat as the other 9 teams? If Dan is that big a problem that we simply have to accept this set up as being the best way for us, that still means we’re stuck hoping to achieve what much, much fewer have than otherwise during the salary cap era. 
 

That’s all I’m saying. :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.