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

[Panninho]

Just now, FLSkinz83 said:

 

I was speaking generally about how I view the importance of each pillar of an organization.   I think it would be the same here.  I could be wrong.   We've never had the QB or Front office acumen to put it to the test....and the coaching hasn't been good enough to compensate.

I think the fact that in 20+ years we haven't had the FO structure, coaching or QB talent to succeed is indicative of the problems at the highest position. If the structure isn't there, people won't succeed. We had all these great offensive coaches who went on to become the hottest HCs in the league and yet we couldn't get anything done. All this offensive brain power and still no success to show for it. These people were here and still were not successful.

20+ years of misery doesn't happen by chance. At some point it is because of structural and systemic issues. Badly run companies will waste talent because people are not set up to succeed. If the culture sucks, you'll never be able to create sustainable success. It always starts at the top.

We always look at the Mahomes and Herberts who star elsewhere and are sad that we didn't draft them but I don't believe for one second that these players would have enjoyed the same level of success here. Because it's not a pleasent place to work. It has impact on the coaches and it has impact on the players. I don't think many people have enjoyed being here and you won't overcome that, no matter who you bring in.

 

I think the fact that the coaching, talent and front office have sucked for 20+ years is the direct result of bad ownership and leadership.

[FLSkinz83]

19 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Teams can win with bad owners but IMO its difficult and I think we got the worst.  So I don't see all bad owners as equally bad.

 

For example, Dan is cheap like Mike Brown and while isn't as nepotism driven with his FO hires as Brown and is cheap but not as cheap as Brown as far as spending on scouts, etc, Dan still prefers to be buddies with his top FO guy -- and I don't recall hearing stories of Mike Brown overriding his scouts decisions on the draft and being a douche behind the scenes where he is ruling by fear, paranoia and delusion.  

 

Dan IMO is sadly the combination of the greatest hits of name that bad owner.  He's not just Fredy Krueger.  But he's Krueger, Jason, Michael Myers combined. 

 

Back when Dan was willing to spend and had a splash side to his ownership -- I used to think hey the dude sucks but at least he's not boring and is willing to spend money.  But that's not true anymore either.   He's cheap and the splash days are over.  Back in the day at least Dan can sell some tickets and the NFL would want to put his team on prime time TV.  Now, this franchise is as irrelevant and yawn as the Bengals were in Brown's down years. 

 

You kind of lost me here.   I know Rivera is your guy, but do you put any blame on him or is the aura of Dan so bad that it doesn't matter?  

 

I feel like I need to repeat this from time to time, but.....I'm not a Snyder fan.  He lost any support I had for him after the name change.   

[ClaytoAli]

19 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yep.

 

heck Sheehan said Dan is even cutting back on meals and travel perks.  Ron said they didn't do Richmond this year because of it being expensive.

 

Keim and Standig have said they fished in FA for players but they were out of their price range.  Wanted Collins back but the was too expensive, etc.

 

The whole name thing arguably blew up on Dan by him complaining about his money situation during COVID and forgoed making payments to the minority owners. 

 

When Dan was a new owner, the idea that he was a douche and football dumb was evident from the jump but at least he spent money.  This cheap version of Dan which has been evident through most of Bruce's tenure has really zero going for him. 

 

 

This was already known about Dan from his previous businesses.

[FLSkinz83]

Anyone know how the Panthers handled the cap under Hurney/Rivera?    Were they re-structuring contracts to create cap space, etc?  

[Skinsinparadise]

18 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

Anyone know how the Panthers handled the cap under Hurney/Rivera?    Were they re-structuring contracts to create cap space, etc?  

 

Never studied it but heard one NFL observer say when they hired Hurney part of his problem in Carolina is he signed too many of his own players to big contracts that hurt their cap situation going forward.  Definitely not a rep of being stingy with the cap.

 

I get those who have issues with a coach running the FO -- but isn't a large part of that point centered on what they Hurney did at times at Carolina overspend and worry about the future later on.  Rivera would be in new territory if he was all about the future versus the present especially in a season that he declared as a pivotal one.

 

My best guess is that Ron indeed didn't want to overspend this year because he didn't think the roster was set for the kill -- but plenty of evidence that he wanted to spend more than what they actually did. 

 

https://pantherswire.usatoday.com/2017/07/24/panthers-interim-gm-marty-hurney-talks-about-salary-cap-concerns/

 

Now, some folks think Carolina may soon once again be in cap trouble if Hurney is allowed to run wild with the team’s books again.

Edited September 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

54 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

 

You kind of lost me here.   I know Rivera is your guy, but do you put any blame on him or is the aura of Dan so bad that it doesn't matter?  

   

I can’t speak for SIP but I’m sure our thoughts align on this subject.

 

It all starts and ends with Dan.  Employing a head coach to wear all the hats is setting said head coach up to fail from the start.  Add to that, the unnecessary drama to handle, poor facilities, empty stadium, and the list goes on.  All that stuff is directly related to Dan.

 

Bottom line, coaching here is an uphill battle for which no coach is ever at their best, because they are starting with an anchor around their leg, even if they don’t know it’s there.

Edited September 29, 2022 by BatteredFanSyndrome

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

2 hours ago, FLSkinz83 said:

 

Mike Brown is the latest example.   Bad owner.  Gets the QB and goes to the Superbowl.

 

Bill Bidwell is another example.  Bad owner.  Got Kurt Warner and went to a SB.

 

If you had the best owner, but no QB, you're not winning anything.   Overall personnel can overcome mediocre coaching, but FO vs coaching is a close one to me because coaching in football is by far the most important in all sports.

 

That's spot on! Remember the only other times Mike Brown got to a Super Bowl was when he had good QBs in Ken Anderson and Boomer Esiason. Bidwell had...nothing, really. Neil Lomax was decent, but never even got into the 'paloffs.'

[FLSkinz83]

9 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I can’t speak for SIP but I’m sure our thoughts align on this subject.

 

It all starts and ends with Dan.  Employing a head coach to wear all the hats is setting said head coach up to fail from the start.  Add to that, the unnecessary drama to handle, poor facilities, empty stadium, and the list goes on.  All that stuff is directly related to Dan.

 

Bottom line, coaching here is an uphill battle for which no coach is ever at their best, because they are starting with an anchor around their leg, even if they don’t know it’s there.

 

That's the dilemma...We probably can't get Gibbs, Shanny or even Rivera without giving them total control.   My guess is that Gibbs and Shanny would have been more successful if they weren't in charge of personnel.   Same will probably be true of Rivera.

 

Then the question becomes what kind of GM can he get?   I think most people were excited with Scot McCloughan, but he was mostly a disaster.  

 

<Sigh>  

[Digger]

Don't know what everyone is in a huff about.  I look at this team and see shades of that ol' Zorn/Cerrato magic!

[Skinsinparadise]

26 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I can’t speak for SIP but I’m sure our thoughts align on this subject.

 

It all starts and ends with Dan.  Employing a head coach to wear all the hats is setting said head coach up to fail from the start.  Add to that, the unnecessary drama to handle, poor facilities, empty stadium, and the list goes on.  All that stuff is directly related to Dan.

 

Bottom line, coaching here is an uphill battle for which no coach is ever at their best, because they are starting with an anchor around their leg, even if they don’t know it’s there.

 

 

It's a catch 22 with Dan IMO.

 

Any reputable coach would want personnel control here for 2 reasons.

 

A.  It's an unattractive place to coach so to make up for it, you'd want more power-perks

 

B. If you don't have personnel control it increases the odds that Dan turns the FO to his personal playground where he makes personnel moves and pits the FO against the coaching staff where there is tension and added dysfunction. 

 

Jay has gotten into the tension multiple times in postcasts this year.   Odd stuff like the FO didn't even weigh in with him about the Alex trade, not listening to his takes about Kirk, hiring assistant coaches without his approval some of whom he didn't get along with -- and the FO bad mouthing him and creating tension.   Granted much of that pointed to Bruce but Dan seems to gravitate to Bruce type shields to do his bidding. 

 

Do I prefer a GM centric approach.  You bet.  I talked about it plenty in the old FO thread.  But I am not sure how well it would work here -- we've tried it -- granted with buffoon GMs but Dan seems to gravitate towards those types because he co-opts the operation.

 

It's really pathetic.  It's one of a number reasons why this dude has to go. 

 

I like Jason Wright and Rivera and think they are classy people.  But I'd easily say bye to them or anyone to get rid of Dan.  

Edited September 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[BrentMeisterGeneral]

 

[NickyJ]

59 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

 

That's the dilemma...We probably can't get Gibbs, Shanny or even Rivera without giving them total control.   My guess is that Gibbs and Shanny would have been more successful if they weren't in charge of personnel.   Same will probably be true of Rivera.

 

Then the question becomes what kind of GM can he get?   I think most people were excited with Scot McCloughan, but he was mostly a disaster.  

 

<Sigh>  

What do you think is the reason we can't get Gibbs, Shanny, or Rivera without giving them full control? I completely agree that we can't, but what about this team would cause total control to be the only offer they'd agree to?

Edited September 29, 2022 by NickyJ

[dyst]

Please refer to Dan as Mr. Snyder. He would very much appreciate it. That is all.

[Gurgeh]

32 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

What do you think is the reason we can't get Gibbs, Shanny, or Rivera without giving them full control? I completely agree that we can't, but what about this team would cause total control to be the only offer they'd agree to?

 

Leverage. As in, a quality coach knows how desperate the situation is here, and how unattractive the organisation is, both on and especially off the field. So, whoever comes here is going to ask for everything they can get. And if they don't get it, and they're that good a coach, they won't be short of other offers.

[Redwards]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

It's a catch 22 with Dan IMO.

 

Any reputable coach would want personnel control here for 2 reasons.

 

A.  It's an unattractive place to coach so to make up for it, you'd want more power-perks

 

B. If you don't have personnel control it increases the odds that Dan turns the FO to his personal playground where he makes personnel moves and pits the FO against the coaching staff where there is tension and added dysfunction. 

 

Jay has gotten into the tension multiple times in postcasts this year.   Odd stuff like the FO didn't even weigh in with him about the Alex trade, not listening to his takes about Kirk, hiring assistant coaches without his approval some of whom he didn't get along with -- and the FO bad mouthing him and creating tension.   Granted much of that pointed to Bruce but Dan seems to gravitate to Bruce type shields to do his bidding. 

 

Do I prefer a GM centric approach.  You bet.  I talked about it plenty in the old FO thread.  But I am not sure how well it would work here -- we've tried it -- granted with buffoon GMs but Dan seems to gravitate towards those types because he co-opts the operation.

 

It's really pathetic.  It's one of a number reasons why this dude has to go. 

 

I like Jason Wright and Rivera and think they are classy people.  But I'd easily say bye to them or anyone to get rid of Dan.  

That's about as good a summation as it gets.

 

👏

37 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

What do you think is the reason we can't get Gibbs, Shanny, or Rivera without giving them full control? I completely agree that we can't, but what about this team would cause total control to be the only offer they'd agree to?

Because everyone who's anyone knows exactly who and what Dan is as a person and owner.  And they all see how EVERYONE leaves this place: with their reputation in tatters and full of anger.  

 

No one of repute will even think about dealing with Dan and his absolute nonsense....unless, just maybe, the total control tease - and the inevitable overpay that comes with it - is just too much to resist.  I think every single coach (if the were being honest) who agrees to be Dan's hire knows from the jump that it's probably not gonna work.  That the odds are more than likely just too great to overcome to be successful - and that means Super Bowls and consistent winning.  But with all the loot and power thrown in, they think "Just maybe, if I get lucky...we may be pretty good for a little while.  What the heck?  I'll give it a go.".

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, FLSkinz83 said:

 

You kind of lost me here.   I know Rivera is your guy, but do you put any blame on him or is the aura of Dan so bad that it doesn't matter?  

 

I feel like I need to repeat this from time to time, but.....I'm not a Snyder fan.  He lost any support I had for him after the name change.   

 

Rivera has nothing to do with my feelings about Dan.

 

Maybe a better way for me to explain it is this way.  There was a dude who used to come on here and defend Dan on just about everything and would say Dan's problem has simply being hiring the wrong people as coaches.

 

My response to that is.  You got A or B.

 

A.  Dan is terrible at hiring the right people

B.  Dan is the common denominator versus his coaches all with losing records are bad:  Gibbs, Shanny, Zorn, Jay, Rivera

 

I am hardcore on B and big time.  But even if I believed in A which is Dan is terrible at making good hires -- its also a major indictment on him. 

 

I run my own business.  The buck stops with me.  I don't blame mistakes on my employees.  I set the culture of my own business not my employees.  And if my employees are incompetent that reflects my incompetence not theirs.

 

As I said in another post, I don't care who the collateral damage is -- Rivera could go and name my favorite player to get rid of Dan.   And I got zero cognitive dissonance about it.  I'd make that trade without hesitation. 

Edited September 29, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[88Comrade2000]

I saw a comment somewhere where they said Dan wasn't a fan of the team but a fan of owning the team.  I think he's right to a certain extent.

 

Would a fan of the team accept what has been the last 23 years?

 

I think Robert Kraft was a big Pats fan, who became the owner in the mid 90's.  Parcells was coach when he bought the team. Then Pete Carroll and Bill.  Robert did everything to make Pats winner.

 

Dan hasn't done anything.  Owning the Redskins was an ego thing for him.  It become his identity.  You would think, after his early stumbles; he would take a look at the successful teams did to become successful and imitate that.  He didn't do that.  He had to be involved, especially when he didn't give the coach the power.    Why he never went with the traditional GM route and let them hire the coach?      Vinny wasn't a GM- just acting like one but really Dan was.  He gave the unqualified Bruce the gm duties after firing Mike but he wasn't a real gm either.

 

The Redskins were Dan little toy.

 

Well, he's destroyed that toy.  His off the field antics that he participated in or allowed to happen; has hurt this team.  The best players don't want to come here.  He can't get anyone to pay for a new stadium.  He can't get a decent coach without giving them full control, when that coach should be a coach only and not GM.   Gibbs, Shanny and Rivera aren't good GMs.

 

There's no hope as long as Dan owns the team.  The next guy will suck.  Then  Dan will lure someone else by giving him full control and to get anyone good, he'll have to pay an nfl record for coaches to get him.  That person will not be successful.

 

Rinse and repeat over an over again.

 

 

[FLSkinz83]

Very good film breakdown by Cooley on the Sheehan podcast Today.   I have even less confidence in Turner.  

[Skinsinparadise]

29 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

Very good film breakdown by Cooley on the Sheehan podcast Today.   I have even less confidence in Turner.  

 

I'll listen.  I love that Cooley is doing this again on a regular basis.  I thought it was hilarious when Cooley was still working for the team, and trashing for example the Haskins (RIP) pick saying he's not a first round talent -- speaking of Dan and his draft crushes on players going wrong. 

[FLSkinz83]

20 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I'll listen.  I love that Cooley is doing this again on a regular basis.  I thought it was hilarious when Cooley was still working for the team, and trashing for example the Haskins (RIP) pick saying he's not a first round talent -- speaking of Dan and his draft crushes on players going wrong. 

 

I've been wondering why it seems like our play action passes never seem to work....he talks about that.  Cooley is very good at noticing the little things.  

[Spaceman Spiff]

4 hours ago, Panninho said:

If the culture sucks, you'll never be able to create sustainable success. It always starts at the top.

We always look at the Mahomes and Herberts who star elsewhere and are sad that we didn't draft them but I don't believe for one second that these players would have enjoyed the same level of success here. Because it's not a pleasent place to work. It has impact on the coaches and it has impact on the players. I don't think many people have enjoyed being here and you won't overcome that, no matter who you bring in.

 

 

 

BuT TeRrY SiGnEd HeRe! McKiSsiC CaMe BaCk!  PeOpLe WaNt 2 pLaY HeRe!

[88Comrade2000]

There was 2 times in Dan's reign of terror that he suffered major fan revolt.  Right at the end of the Spurrier and Zorn eras.   

 

He's probably going to enter his third era of fan revolt; except this time, they aren't that many fans left.  When the Rivera era

reaches in evitable conclusion; what is Dan going to do?   This time all his chickens have come to roost.  Scandal after scandal.

Even if the fever dream of him being removed comes true; it will take 2-3 years.  What little fans that remain don't care.

 

Guarantee you that enthusiasm that was there for the opener, will fade away; especially as the losses pile up.

Noone is going to be left to care.

 

 

 

 

 

[Zim489]

 

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

19 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

 

 

But...but...Snyder said we finally have ourselves a QB!! Right? 🤔

[Wildbunny]

20 minutes ago, BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen said:

 

But...but...Snyder said we finally have ourselves a QB!! Right? 🤔

He was probably talking about Sam Howell...