Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

A New Start! (the Reboot) The Front Office, Ownership, & Coaching Staff Thread


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:


Only thing I’d add to SIP’s summary of JP’s pod is that JP thinks Kyle Smith is gone.

 

One more bit of info from JLC...

 

 

Kyle smith has been great for us.  With every promotion he receives, our offseasons have gotten better.  It's hard to convince yourself that's just a coincidence.

 

To essentially replace him is a terrible idea.  Supplement him sure, but hire ppl where the end result is KS is gone?  I hope jp is wrong, bc that's a terrible move.  Maybe the new guy can be just as good, but if you're expecting better, the grass isn't always greener on the other side.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Search: 
    Name Teams Together Years Together # of Years Current Team Current Position/Title
    Matt Malspina SEA 1, SF 2000-2010 11 49ers Director of College Scouting
    Ted Thompson GB, SEA 1 1994-2004 11 Packers General Manager
    Kirk Parrish SEA 1, SEA 2 00-04, 10-14 10 Seahawks College Scouting Coordinator
    John Schneider GB, SEA 1, SEA 2 94-96, 00, 10-14 9 Seahawks General Manager
    Scott Fitterer SEA 1, SEA 2 01-04, 10-14 9 Seahawks Director of College Scouting
    Todd Brunner SF, SEA 2 05-10, 12-14 9 Seahawks Area Scout (Northeast)
    Will Lewis GB, SEA 1, SEA 2 97-98, 00-04, 10-11 9 Chiefs Director of Pro Scouting
    Derrick Jensen SEA 1, SEA 2 00-05, 10-12 8 None Retired
    John 'Red' Cochran GB 1994-2000 7 None Deceased
    Reggie McKenzie GB 1994-2000 7 Raiders General Manager
    Ron Wolf GB 1994-2000 7 None Retired
    Shaun Herock GB 1994-2000 7 Raiders Director of College Scouting
    David McCloughan SF 2005-2010 6 Raiders College Scout
    Eric Stokes SEA 1, SEA 2 01-04, 10-11 6 Dolphins Assistant General Manager
  •  
  •  
  • Green Bay's personnel staff never exceeded 13 people, but they did have nearly seven college scouts per year during McCloughan's tenure there.
  • Seattle Seahawks (2000-2004):

     

    Position/Title 2000 Post Draft 2001 2002 2003 2004
    General Manager Mike Holmgren Mike Holmgren Mike Holmgren Bob Ferguson Bob Ferguson
    Executive VP       Mike Holmgren Mike Holmgren
    VP of Football Operations Ted Thompson Ted Thompson Ted Thompson Ted Thompson Ted Thompson
    Director of Player Personnel John Schneider        
    Director of Pro Personnel Will Lewis Will Lewis Will Lewis Will Lewis Will Lewis
    Asst. Director of Pro Personnel Tag Ribary        
    Pro Personnel Assistant John Jamison John Jamison John Jamison John Jamison John Jamison
    Pro Personnel Assistant   Eric Stokes Eric Stokes Eric Stokes Eric Stokes
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • The front office was pretty bare when McCloughan first arrived in San Francisco, but he essentially turned over half of the staff within less than two months after the draft by firing the aforementioned men and bringing in his brother David McCloughan, one of his scouts from Seattle in Matt Malaspina, Trent Baalke, Tom Gamble and Roylin Bradley.  He also added Quentus Cumby to the pro personnel team in early 2006.  In the writing game, all of this is what we like to call "foreshadowing".

Seattle Seahawks (2010-2014):

 

Position/Title 2010 Post Draft 2011 2012 2013 2014 Pre Draft
General Manager John Schneider John Schneider John Schneider John Schneider John Schneider
Senior Personnel Executive Scot McCloughan Scot McCloughan Scot McCloughan Scot McCloughan Scot McCloughan
Executive VP of Football Ops Pete Carroll Pete Carroll Pete Carroll Pete Carroll Pete Carroll
VP of Football Operations Will Lewis Will Lewis      
Director of Pro Personnel Tag Ribary Tag Ribary Tag Ribary Trent Kirchner Trent Kirchner
Asst. Director Pro Personnel Trent Kirchner Trent Kirchner Trent Kirchner Dan Morgan Dan Morgan
Pro Scout Dale Thompson Dan Morgan Dan Morgan   Nolan Teasley
Director of College Scouting Scott Fitterer Scott Fitterer Scott Fitterer Scott Fitterer Scott Fitterer
Asst. Director College Scouting Eric Stokes Eric Stokes    
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting the info, SIP.  It's RR call.  We shall see.  Guess we will know about Schoen if/when Bills are out of the playoffs.  It's wait and see.  

Edited by RWJ
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

I like Mayhew and his story. He went to law school with a friend of mine. 

 

That said, i just want somebody who is great at lower round picks and that's not Mayhew. Maybe he was limited in Detroit but I haven't seen it from him. I haven't studied the other guys enough but i want to hit on 60% of the picks in rounds 4 through 7. I don't mean just making a roster but guys who actually get playing time. I was giving SDH all this credit for being a great pick but he never amounted to anything here. I want more players who actually play. 

 

60% hit would be amazing for the 2th-4th round let alone 4th through 7th if you look at league wide hit rates.

 

As Rivera among others have said the GM spot isn't purely about picking players but also building a culture and helping run the team. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Stokes, 47, a former safety for the Seahawks, joined Coach Ron Rivera in Washington last year after working with him in Carolina. Stokes spent five seasons (2015-19) in the Panthers’ scouting department after serving as the assistant general manager for the Miami Dolphins (2014-15), as the director of college scouting for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2012-13) and in various scouting roles for Seattle, lastly as the assistant director of college scouting.

 

But while Stokes is in the mix, there has been no indication that Washington’s vice president of player personnel, Kyle Smith, who ranks higher than Stokes in the department, will be interviewed.

 
 

Smith, 36, started with Washington as an intern in 2010 and was hired full time in 2011 as an area scout, a role he held for six seasons before being appointed director of college personnel in 2017. Shortly after Rivera was hired last January, Smith was promoted to his current title, making him the top personnel executive on staff.

Rivera has provided few details about the general manager position, saying only that “there’s a lot to it” and it’s “not just picking players and making decisions on contracts or hiring coaches or what have you. It is a big task.”

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

If they add a good GM into the mix maybe that combination helps?


This is, like, literally the main point I’ve been making regarding your leanings that  “HC as Football Emperor” is not really the best model but is the best model only to keep crazy Dan at bay... and then you just drop this like it’s nothing? :ols: 😛 
 

I’m just playing, but I think you do mistake (not purposely or in a sinister manner) one of the key points I’m making about this, so forgive me if I sound like a broken record but it’s worth repeating just based off what I’m reading here.

 

I have a problem calling the current organizational model we have “coach-centric”. As originally implemented with Ron, it just didn’t fit any of the models around the league recently referred to as such. This model was always Dan’s “Football Emperor” model that he’s employed before, he just hijacked the “coach centric” label because it was a buzz word around the league after the Chiefs, Bills and Niners employed it to much success. I just hate how everyone fell for it. We shouldn’t let him get away with it. Those teams did not just hand ultimate power over to their coaches; what made them “coach-centric” was only that those coaches were hired first and/or had a major say in the hiring of the GM. Then said coach and GM were made equals in rank and were given full autonomy over their respective departments (the Niners have an interesting checks and balances system they also added between the two, but I digress). 
 

Really, the only significant difference between that and a traditional GM-centric model is that the GM isn’t in charge of hiring/firing the HC or his assistants since they’re equals. Neither is above the other and someone else above them (owner/CEO/Team President) makes that decision. 
 

There is only one team that has shown sustainable success employing the Emperor model Dan implemented with Ron and that’s the Patriots. That’s it. And I know we both have agreed in the past that Brady was the biggest factor to that success, so emulating them was always a silly endeavor and a crutch for fans who love to overly-emphasize the impact of coaching at the pro level. 
 

 If we do hire a legit GM with personnel chops, which it seems like we’re doing, then it resembles only the Seahawks in terms of successful examples of a similar “HC as Football Emperor” model. And Ron is similar to Caroll in that he’ll pretty much give that guy the authority to build the roster, I just don’t like that it’s not official. The Seahawks have a weird dynamic there where it's not official with Schneider, yet Caroll essentially credits him with everything. Someone can actually hire Schneider away from there even with him keeping the same title just by inserting final say into his contract so it wouldn’t be considered a lateral move. That’s crazy to me why they’d risk that and there was even talk towards the end of the season he could get plucked away because of it. 
 

More than that, though, there is something to be said about formalizing processes and binding them contractually to everyone involved so no one unwarrantedly interferes. And that is not a negation of collaboration, it’s the opposite actually. When there is trust between people and everyone has the autonomy to fulfill their roles relative to their expertise, they support each other much more positively and have no ulterior motives or suspicions. 
 

Again, I know you agree with the above and you’re focused on Dan being the maniacal loser he is, but I think it bore repeating and flows into the following point I’m making to counter your inclination here that this is the best way to manage Dan. 
 

Now, as unlikely as it is, Ron bringing in someone who he’d consider an equal to him in rank and giving him final say over his respective department would make a strong combination against Dan interfering negatively. They both can handle him and manage him, especially if, as you say, their personalities are similar and fit the “Dan-handling” type.
 

I mean, to be honest, I’m not sure there’s such a thing even. We can point to Gibbs and how Ron is of a similar temperament, but did he really “handle” Dan? I know you and I have both made the argument against others that, actually, it was a big problem and Gibbs humored him too much. So I know you agree with me here and if we’re saying Ron is like Gibbs, then I’m not sure that’s a big enough positive to justify having a model that fails at an extremely high rate. 
 

Which means we’re just settling for something as is because, well, that’s the situation we’re in right now. It’s not really anything more than that. 
 

I just want a qualified GM hired and given the authority he should have respective to that position. I can’t believe this is STILL a thing with Dan. It’s maddening. The fact is, successful coach-centric models around the league ACTUALLY HAVE THAT. We can’t act like they don’t and that the model we have is the same. And we should recognize that we’re employing a model that almost NEVER works. I know people want to kill me for saying that and it’s depressing, but I’m sorry. It’s the truth. I challenge anyone to show me otherwise. Go study the various models around the league. Doesn’t mean it won’t work, just that it’s highly likely not to. Which is unfortunate. 
 

And I just don’t see why I should assume this is the best way to handle Dan while ignoring that we’ve never actually seen a normal - proven to be conducive to success at the pro level - organizational set up with a qualified GM in charge of his respective department (again, that happens in Coach-centric models and not just GM-centric ones). Your points about the type of personality needed to manage Dan are valid, but they aren’t strong enough, in my opinion, to mean it can only apply to a Head Coach and not a GM. 
 

Anyway, I’m going to stop here with you on this (though I always enjoy our conversations :) ). I’m not annoyed at you’re thinking, to the contrary, I hope you’re right and I see validity in it. The reason I want to cut it off here is I just know that what I’m saying is met with a ton of annoyance from most posters and so I’m just being a source of frustration, especially after we just made the playoffs and people are still on that high. I just can’t help but be slightly disappointed if this hire isn’t given final say over the roster, or at least the 90 during the offseason. And I think I just have way too much evidence on my side to feel that way.

 

I know you’re ok with this because of how crazy Dan is, but I just can’t get to that point. Best way to sum up why I can’t is because Crazy Dan is crazy no matter what and can only be handled to a point, will corrupt organizational hierarchies no matter what, and has no clue what sound organizational principles are... so I just want the best model proven to be conducive to success around the league implemented here just to see what happens. :) 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

60% hit would be amazing for the 2th-4th round let alone 4th through 7th if you look at league wide hit rates.

 

Not really. Just look at some of our recent drafts and UDFA classes. 

2020: 
Curl

Gibson

Wright

Smith-Williams

Hudson

 

2019: 

Cole Luke

Sims

Harmon

McLaurin

Holcomb

Moreland

 

2018

Christian

Jeremy Reaves

Sims

Settle

Stroman

Quinn

Danny Johnson

SDH

Apke

 

2017

Perine

Moreau

Nicholson

Roullier

JHC

 

I know my memory is fading because its so late but we have been able to find guys who are back of the roster but able to contribute on the field in a positive ways. I don't know if we're hitting a 60% number but we're good at finding this talent. We saw that with the injuries and lack of production we were getting from our offensive guys and so we kept rotating that number 2 WR until Cam Sims stuck and got respectable production. But Wright and S Sims also showed some abilities, as did Harmon last year. At RB we haven't been able to find a go to guy but we have found guys who could come in and contribute like Perine & Guice. None of our OL have worked out lately so that's a problem area. Same with LBs other than some dazzling plays here and there. But we seem to have found some young talent at S with Reaves and Curl. I don't think thats a finished position but its nice that we have bodies there. And for all the love the first round DL gets, its nice to have guys like Settle who can step in and produce. 

 

But basically what I'm looking for is better than a 4/7 guys who can come in and contribute. Not starter material, but better than that baseline of making the roster. I hated Gibbs's drafts in the second go around because I basically knew that the guys we drafted with the exception of Cooley were going to be special teamers and little more. Casserly in the 90s was almost the opposite where he'd always find like 3 or 4 quality rotational pieces in rounds 3-7 & UDFA. I just want to not be so reliant on first round picks and be able to find those gems who can help sustain winning without needing to break the bank. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:


This is, like, literally the main point I’ve been making regarding your leanings that  “HC as Football Emperor” is not really the best model but is the best model only to keep crazy Dan at bay... and then you just drop this like it’s nothing? :ols: 😛 
 

I’m just playing, but I think you do mistake (not purposely or in a sinister manner) one of the key points I’m making about this, so forgive me if I sound like a broken record but it’s worth repeating just based off what I’m reading here.

 

I have a problem calling the current organizational model we have “coach-centric”. As originally implemented with Ron, it just didn’t fit any of the models around the league recently referred to as such. This model was always Dan’s “Football Emperor” model that he’s employed before, he just hijacked the “coach centric” label because it was a buzz word around the league after the Chiefs, Bills and Niners employed it to much success. I just hate how everyone fell for it. We shouldn’t let him get away with it. Those teams did not just hand ultimate power over to their coaches; what made them “coach-centric” was only that those coaches were hired first and/or had a major say in the hiring of the GM. Then said coach and GM were made equals in rank and were given full autonomy over their respective departments (the Niners have an interesting checks and balances system they also added between the two, but I digress). 
 

Really, the only significant difference between that and a traditional GM-centric model is that the GM isn’t in charge of hiring/firing the HC or his assistants since they’re equals. Neither is above the other and someone else above them (owner/CEO/Team President) makes that decision. 
 

There is only one team that has shown sustainable success employing the Emperor model Dan implemented with Ron and that’s the Patriots. That’s it. And I know we both have agreed in the past that Brady was the biggest factor to that success, so emulating them was always a silly endeavor and a crutch for fans who love to overly-emphasize the impact of coaching at the pro level. 
 

 If we do hire a legit GM with personnel chops, which it seems like we’re doing, then it resembles only the Seahawks in terms of successful examples of a similar “HC as Football Emperor” model. And Ron is similar to Caroll in that he’ll pretty much give that guy the authority to build the roster, I just don’t like that it’s not official. The Seahawks have a weird dynamic there where it's not official with Schneider, yet Caroll essentially credits him with everything. Someone can actually hire Schneider away from there even with him keeping the same title just by inserting final say into his contract so it wouldn’t be considered a lateral move. That’s crazy to me why they’d risk that and there was even talk towards the end of the season he could get plucked away because of it. 
 

More than that, though, there is something to be said about formalizing processes and binding them contractually to everyone involved so no one unwarrantedly interferes. And that is not a negation of collaboration, it’s the opposite actually. When there is trust between people and everyone has the autonomy to fulfill their roles relative to their expertise, they support each other much more positively and have no ulterior motives or suspicions. 
 

Again, I know you agree with the above and you’re focused on Dan being the maniacal loser he is, but I think it bore repeating and flows into the following point I’m making to counter your inclination here that this is the best way to manage Dan. 
 

Now, as unlikely as it is, Ron bringing in someone who he’d consider an equal to him in rank and giving him final say over his respective department would make a strong combination against Dan interfering negatively. They both can handle him and manage him, especially if, as you say, their personalities are similar and fit the “Dan-handling” type.
 

I mean, to be honest, I’m not sure there’s such a thing even. We can point to Gibbs and how Ron is of a similar temperament, but did he really “handle” Dan? I know you and I have both made the argument against others that, actually, it was a big problem and Gibbs humored him too much. So I know you agree with me here and if we’re saying Ron is like Gibbs, then I’m not sure that’s a big enough positive to justify having a model that fails at an extremely high rate. 
 

Which means we’re just settling for something as is because, well, that’s the situation we’re in right now. It’s not really anything more than that. 
 

I just want a qualified GM hired and given the authority he should have respective to that position. I can’t believe this is STILL a thing with Dan. It’s maddening. The fact is, successful coach-centric models around the league ACTUALLY HAVE THAT. We can’t act like they don’t and that the model we have is the same. And we should recognize that we’re employing a model that almost NEVER works. I know people want to kill me for saying that and it’s depressing, but I’m sorry. It’s the truth. I challenge anyone to show me otherwise. Go study the various models around the league. Doesn’t mean it won’t work, just that it’s highly likely not to. Which is unfortunate. 
 

And I just don’t see why I should assume this is the best way to handle Dan while ignoring that we’ve never actually seen a normal - proven to be conducive to success at the pro level - organizational set up with a qualified GM in charge of his respective department (again, that happens in Coach-centric models and not just GM-centric ones). Your points about the type of personality needed to manage Dan are valid, but they aren’t strong enough, in my opinion, to mean it can only apply to a Head Coach and not a GM. 
 

Anyway, I’m going to stop here with you on this (though I always enjoy our conversations :) ). I’m not annoyed at you’re thinking, to the contrary, I hope you’re right and I see validity in it. The reason I want to cut it off here is I just know that what I’m saying is met with a ton of annoyance from most posters and so I’m just being a source of frustration, especially after we just made the playoffs and people are still on that high. I just can’t help but be slightly disappointed if this hire isn’t given final say over the roster, or at least the 90 during the offseason. And I think I just have way too much evidence on my side to feel that way.

 

I know you’re ok with this because of how crazy Dan is, but I just can’t get to that point. Best way to sum up why I can’t is because Crazy Dan is crazy no matter what and can only be handled to a point, will corrupt organizational hierarchies no matter what, and has no clue what sound organizational principles are... so I just want the best model proven to be conducive to success around the league implemented here just to see what happens. :) 

That's a lot of words to say a whole lot of nothing

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JoggingGod said:

That's a lot of words to say a whole lot of nothing


giphy.gif?cid=4d1e4f29u50yju2cwgc0o5kzr9

16 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

Anyway, I’m going to stop here with you on this (though I always enjoy our conversations :) ). I’m not annoyed at you’re thinking, to the contrary, I hope you’re right and I see validity in it. The reason I want to cut it off here is I just know that what I’m saying is met with a ton of annoyance from most posters and so I’m just being a source of frustration, especially after we just made the playoffs and people are still on that high.


See why I said that, @Skinsinparadise, dude didn’t even read it and had an attack ready to go. :ols: 

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, -JB- said:

It probably has to do with multiple guys in the same position for other teams have actually had sustained success winning with those organizations.  Since Smith has been VP of Player Personnel have we had a winning record or made the playoffs even once?  Slow down with the Kyle Smith love affair.  Give him a few more years in his current role before he gets anybody’s GM job.  Earn it.

 

This was his first year as VP of Player Personnel and they had a good draft, signed some free agents that worked out, and the team was in the playoffs.  

 

Mayhew's front office record of ineptitude speaks for itself.  So winning records and playoffs can't be the criteria they're going off of.

Edited by justice98
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not going to be annoyed about this process because I thought we would just cast a wide net. We didn't just look to hire the first guy Rivera knows and become Carolina 2.0. I has that feeling before and was critical about it. 

 

But now I need to say something because we totally ignore the youngest guy in the office who at least looks to have done a solid job. Now we interview Stokes... It's unfair to give a guy like that a shot and not give Kyle an interview. If I would be Kyle I would be pretty pissed. If they don't respect his work. Right now I'm pretty sure he stays until the draft and then is fired.

 

If we then hire a guy Rivera worked with in the past. I will be critical of it. Because that's no way better then the old Tampa old boys network. Please just hire the best guy and be respectful to the guys who worked for you! Do not just hire the guy you have the best relation with...

Edited by wilco_holland
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I’m in the minority of not being bothered if Kyle Smith stays or goes. I’ve being saying for a long while I think Rivera will overhaul the full gig with his own people. That’s just the way it goes.

 

I’m more interested in the quality of people we bring in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people vastly overestimate their understanding of who in the FO is responsible for what. The reality is it's largely a black box. There's a whole staff of scouts under Kyle, btw. Not like he's the only guy watching film lol. I don't pretend to know either FWIW. That's why I'm mostly zen about it. Whatever will be, will be - just hope for the best.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I think Kyle absolutely has the potential to be a great GM in this league and I’ve been a fan of his work for some time now, so I get the general consternation that exists among us about him being looked over and/or not given a shot at the position, but we have to understand that an equally important aspect of this hire is that there’s synergy between the head personnel exec and the head coach. 
 

As fans of this team we should know this better than anyone else, as there hasn’t been a coach here that has had real support and a synergistic relationship with their personnel department during Dan’s tenure, which in my view is the biggest reason they all either fail miserably or are unable to sustain success for any significant amount of time, all departing with losing records. 
 

Now, that can’t come at the expense of qualifications or proven expertise, so the hire has to be both someone Ron is comfortable with as well as someone who has proven to be good at what he does. But we shouldn’t be mad if the latter isn’t the only thing Ron’s looking at and the former has equal weight. 
 

I think Kyle is perfectly capable, but for whatever reason he’s just not a fit. I’d love to know why, but that’s what’s unfolding before us. The Stokes interview essentially confirms it. I’m going to be extremely disappointed if it’s solely because of a lack of the authority the position should hold and only people willing to accept that qualify, but I find it difficult to believe a guy like Cowden would come here without that either, so I’m holding off on that thought for now. Now, if we find out it’s because of Snyder or something, then yeah, they deserve every ounce of criticism we levy at them regarding the hiring process, but until that’s made clear I think it’s fair to assume Ron is leading this. 
 

I mean, we’ve simply NEVER seen an extensive hiring process like this for the GM position. It’s frankly awesome and what many of us have been begging for, for years. All these guys with a history of evaluating talent, quite a few coming from really successful programs... it’s glorious. It’s hard to believe Snyder is behind that. I don’t think that guy actually knows what a sound hiring process looks like. 
 

If Ron ends up hiring a former Panthers’ associate, then ok, I can see why we would have an issue with that. But someone like Cowden, Schoen, Wooden, or even Polk? I think I’m 100% ok with that. 
 

So I’m not one to just look at everything with burgundy and gold glasses, but I feel pretty good about the way this is going so far, even if my initial desire of Kyle getting promoted to the position doesn’t happen. I just pray it ends up, structurally, in the way it has been proven to be most conducive to success. If not, it’s disappointing but still way better than anything we’ve ever had during Snyder’s tenure. 
 

As always, have to qualify all the above with a reminder that Dan is still the owner and all can be corrupted within a moment’s notice. 😕

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, justice98 said:

 

This was his first year as VP of Player Personnel and they had a good draft, signed some free agents that worked out, and the team was in the playoffs.  

 

Mayhew's front office record of ineptitude speaks for itself.  So winning records and playoffs can't be the criteria they're going off of.

How could you say that when not only was he VP of player personnel with the 49ers when they just made the SB but also has experience as GM with the Lions?  With the Lions (another ****ty organization like Washington who never has sustained success no matter who is there) actually made the playoffs twice during his time there (remarkable considering Detroit has made the playoffs only 3 times since 2000) and they actually had an 11 win season something Washington hasn’t achieved in about 30 years! 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what Jason Wright said about Ron's GM search when he was on Grant's show earlier this week.

 

 

"You don’t hire a defensive coordinator like Jack Del Rio who is an accomplished and successful head coach, not a wallflower personality to lead your defense when you're entering this if you want yes men," Wright said. "He's looking for people who are capable leaders who will express and voice their opinion. He’s looking for people who have a strong perspective in strategy”. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:


This is, like, literally the main point I’ve been making regarding your leanings that  “HC as Football Emperor” is not really the best model but is the best model only to keep crazy Dan at bay... and then you just drop this like it’s nothing? :ols: 😛 
 

 

lol, but I meant GM in the context of Rivera's coach centric model though which I gather you oppose because the GM doesn't have final say  😀. So my point is adding a third person with Ron's type of gravatis, leadership skills, integrity would help double down on what he's trying to accomplish.  In the model you support here (correct me if I am wrong), Dan would hire the GM.  The GM would hire the coach.  The coach works for the GM. The hierarchy is Dan-GM-Coach.  The fundamental difference we have is I want a GM who feels beholden to the coach not Dan. 

 

I've worked for crazy people like Dan.  I have more or less 60 clients every two years give and take so I've worked for all types.  So I am borrowing some of that experience.   If we have a staff on it of people who are all loyal to each other from past jobs -- things run much more smoothly because we have each others back and can gang up when we need to on the client.  When it goes the other way where the client brings in some of their people with the mix of some of my mine and said client is hard to please and a bit unhinged under stress like Dan can become -- things often turn messy with backbiting and dysfunction.   And it's not per se about how good these people are at their job.  In any job you have bumps in the road.  And how you handle that is key.  And a crazy boss like Dan makes the whole journey much harder and things can get unfocused really fast. 

 

A key point to me is if we didn't get someone like Ron we'd get someone like Marvin Lewis and none of this culture change would likely be happening period.  I think Bruce would have survived.  I don't think the FO would have changed much at all.  I don't even think we'd have a shot period at the culture change if this wasn't a Rivera hire and he was given that type of power to attract him to this lousy culture/losing team at the time. 

 

I genuinely think if Dan went in your direction, we'd have almost no change.  Not because there is anything wrong with a GM centric moodel.  I like that model a lot.  But I think its pie in the sky in the context of what was going on.  Either Lewis would have been hired and Bruce likely would have surived and we'd have the whole Dan version of the GM centric model.  Or lets say he hired a GM and let him hire the coach.  Dan would then have the GM he wants which I am more fearful about than you that it turns into Bruce Allen, Vinny Cerrato Part 2 and the "culture change" is estabished by the very dude that we are trying to avoid putting his stamp on the team.

 

 

10 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Now, as unlikely as it is, Ron bringing in someone who he’d consider an equal to him in rank and giving him final say over his respective department would make a strong combination against Dan interfering negatively. They both can handle him and manage him, especially if, as you say, their personalities are similar and fit the “Dan-handling” type.
 

I just want a qualified GM hired and given the authority he should have respective to that position. I can’t believe this is STILL a thing with Dan. It’s maddening. The fact is, successful coach-centric models around the league ACTUALLY HAVE THAT. We can’t act like they don’t and that the model we have is the same. And we should recognize that we’re employing a model that almost NEVER works. I know people want to kill me for saying that and it’s depressing, but I’m sorry. It’s the truth. I challenge anyone to show me otherwise. Go study the various models around the league. Doesn’t mean it won’t work, just that it’s highly likely not to. Which is unfortunate. 

 

I love the idea of ganging up on Dan with another person.  But if Rivera doesn't want to give that final GM authority over him, that's fine with me.  I'd prefer it the other way, too but it would be somewhat strange.  Rivera says I want to hire you but now you are my boss.  That stuff doesn't happen.   

 

Rivera's personality and the way he operates weighs heavily in the soup for me.  The way Dan's personality seems to be and his habits work heavily in the soup for me.   Your thought is we haven't tried it the other way.   My response is yes and no.  We've had it close enough.  We have at different junctures Casserly and Bruce (post Shanny) and Vinny (during the Zorn years) had power but Dan intervened.   Yeah none of whom were good at their jobs but I am not so convinced a more competent version of them would be that much more ideal.   Heck Casserly to this day still caters to Dan publicly I presume because he wants something from him, presumably access to the team.   The power of self preservation is strong in people regardless of their level of competence.  Likewise, Dan's personality is what it is, I don't see it changing. 

 

If we fully run with the traditional GM mode, the coach doesn't hire the GM.  The owner does.  We can dress this in a million different ways but the fundamental aspect of that relationship centers on the GM owing their job to the owner not the coach.  When you factor that and Dan's behavior -- good things IMO don't come of that regardless of how good the general manager is.  And as Cooley likes to say a funamental aspect of being the GM/personnel guy when you work there is to manage Dan.   Eventually, Dan and the GM eventually likely get joined at the hip.  I'd rather have the GM and Ron joined at the hip and that's much more likely to occur if the GM owes his job to the coach versus Dan. 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So the Stokes interview pretty much confirms Smith is gone, but as with everything with this team, Im in wait and see mode before I fly off the handle and start ranting. 

Im getting a Kevin O'Connell vibe here--a young, talented guy who might not fit in whatever the grand scheme is. He might want more of a personnel czar role? Who knows. See what happens and how it all unfolds.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty comfortable with the head coach hiring the general manager. Naturally, any head coach will want a GM who's capable of getting the players he wants but in order for that to happen the GM has to at least have a firm grasp of the many nuances of player personnel and coaching from which to form a strong basis of communication and collaboration with the head coach. Another suit like Bruce Allen would never understand a team's personnel needs on the same level as the coaches, nor would he want to, and such an important position in the hands of someone that inept would be a detriment to the team. Add to the fact that such a GM would be beholden to the whims of a mediocre owner who's not yet demonstrated any remarkable football prowess himself, as opposed to those of a head coach who knows more about the team's needs, and you're left asking yourself who's more qualified to hire a GM than Rivera?

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

So the Stokes interview pretty much confirms Smith is gone, but as with everything with this team, Im in wait and see mode before I fly off the handle and start ranting. 

Im getting a Kevin O'Connell vibe here--a young, talented guy who might not fit in whatever the grand scheme is. He might want more of a personnel czar role? Who knows. See what happens and how it all unfolds.

 

I've been a fan of Kyle Smith for a long time even before it was cool to do so.   I get the impression that Rivera sees the GM spot like this:

 

A.  A partner in helping establishing the culture.  A liason with the players, alumini, people in the building, Dan, and the media so its not all on Ron's plate.  And Ron is looking for a dude with super people skills and are outgoing.

 

B.  Adminstrating the team so all the trains run on time

 

C.  Player selection.

 

Ron has said now a number of times there is more to the GM spot than meets the eye.  In various ways the points above have been made by him or others who cover the team saying what impression they are getting.

 

My best guess is Kyle is all about C.  And not so much B and A.  I think A is a function of his personality.  From what I've heard, he's a likable guy but he's not the most outgoing and in turn not so much the interactive culture building type contributes to morale.  And I gather he's inexperienced in adminstration.  He likes to pick players.  And Ron wants more than someone that picks players.  And considering Stokes is getting an interview I am gathering two things about that.  1.  he has more of those general skills than Kyle.  2.  Rivera has touted his scouting ability and thinks he can pick players well, too.

 

I like Kyle a lot but I am not going to lose it if he leaves assuming they build a FO with other good people.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell on his podcast brought up the idea that Rivera needs a GM who is comfortable working  predominantly on the administrative duties for the team so Rivera can be free to concentrate more on coaching and team building.  Some of these candidates are more "personnel " guys with limited history of real GM (admin) duties.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...