The Official 2023 ES Free Agency Thread... available until Free Agency 2024 begins

[Warhead36]

1 hour ago, method man said:

Secondhand insider info but supposedly the guy reeks of weed frequently when he comes to the facility 

This is complete Chris Russell BS. 

[Going Commando]

Ron has demonstrated that his M.O. here is he will never give a player a big contract extension unless they're coming off a big year.  The deal is, if you want him to offer you a big contract, then you have to give him a big season.  If you do, then the offer will come.  He didn't pay Trent or Dunbar when they wanted extensions before the first season.  He made Scherff play out the season and get All Pro before the extension offer came.  He made Daron, Allen, and Terry all go through the same process, and they did what was asked of them and got their money.  And now he is making Montez and Chase do it too.

 

This is how Ron established his culture and set up the clear and consistent expectations and rewards system for his leaders and best players.  He can't change his M.O. now without ruining that system. 

 

But he has also continuously been misinterpreted outside of the building on these extension situations.  Everyone and their mother thought Daron was on his way out last year, and most spent the year concocting unrealistic trade scenarios they felt were the only logical/realistic outcome to his extension situation.  You guys are now repeating that mistake with Chase and Montez.  Ron is not going to trade them unless they demand a trade.  That would be going back on his part of the deal.  The culture and standard here has become that if you hold up your end as a player and give Ron a big time season, then you will get the big extension offer.  Then you can either walk away from it like Scherff did, or take it like Allen, Terry, and Daron did.

 

It's time for either Chase or Montez to rise to the challenge, meet their potential, and earn a big second contract with a dominant season.  Montez needs to give us several games a year like his Bears performance where he was the best player on the field.  He is capable of doing it, it's just a matter of making it happen.  We'll see if Chase is the same player he used to be after such a devastating injury, but if he gets back to being the 14 AV player he was as a rookie, then he's the best player on our team and will earn a big contract.

 

I'd love to see both of them be great this year, but you have to hope at least one of them is due for a big season.

[method man]

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

Ron has demonstrated that his M.O. here is he will never give a player a big contract extension unless they're coming off a big year.  The deal is, if you want him to offer you a big contract, then you have to give him a big season.  If you do, then the offer will come.  He didn't pay Trent or Dunbar when they wanted extensions before the first season.  He made Scherff play out the season and get All Pro before the extension offer came.  He made Daron, Allen, and Terry all go through the same process, and they did what was asked of them and got their money.  And now he is making Montez and Chase do it too.

 

This is how Ron established his culture and set up the clear and consistent expectations and rewards system for his leaders and best players.  He can't change his M.O. now without ruining that system. 

 

But he has also continuously been misinterpreted outside of the building on these extension situations.  Everyone and their mother thought Daron was on his way out last year, and most spent the year concocting unrealistic trade scenarios they felt were the only logical/realistic outcome to his extension situation.  You guys are now repeating that mistake with Chase and Montez.  Ron is not going to trade them unless they demand a trade.  That would be going back on his part of the deal.  The culture and standard here has become that if you hold up your end as a player and give Ron a big time season, then you will get the big extension offer.  Then you can either walk away from it like Scherff did, or take it like Allen, Terry, and Daron did.

 

It's time for either Chase or Montez to rise to the challenge, meet their potential, and earn a big second contract with a dominant season.  Montez needs to give us several games a year like his Bears performance where he was the best player on the field.  He is capable of doing it, it's just a matter of making it happen.  We'll see if Chase is the same player he used to be after such a devastating injury, but if he gets back to being the 14 AV player he was as a rookie, then he's the best player on our team and will earn a big contract.

 

I'd love to see both of them be great this year, but you have to hope at least one of them is due for a big season.

Just give Montez his 17M a year. With the drafting of Martin, it doesn’t make sense to extend Kam if he is demanding an 8 figure AAV. If anyone disagrees, look at the extensive list of free agent safeties, which includes guys who can play buffalo nickel like Dugger and Chinn

[Est.1974]

I guess in reality there is no need for Ron to trade players for future assets unless he is going to be in the position to cash in on those extra assets in 2024. 
 

I think we should be expecting some fundamental calls from Harris straight away. No chance they have factored a lame duck year for 2023 into their business plan. Absolutely no chance. 

[DWinzit]

4 hours ago, method man said:

Just give Montez his 17M a year. With the drafting of Martin, it doesn’t make sense to extend Kam if he is demanding an 8 figure AAV. If anyone disagrees, look at the extensive list of free agent safeties, which includes guys who can play buffalo nickel like Dugger and Chinn

I am with you on Montez, look to sign him before September. @Going Commandois correct that it doesn't fit Ron's MO. If I were new ownership this would be an agenda item when meeting with Ron and company. By then you should have a good feel for Chase's recovery through camp and preseason play

 

I figure part of the reason Martin was such a draft priority was Kams contract. 

[Skinsinparadise]

9 hours ago, method man said:

Secondhand insider info but supposedly the guy reeks of weed frequently when he comes to the facility 

 

Wow if so.  Logan Paulsen, like me and many others, loved his college tape  but said he hasn't heard the best things about his work ethic.  Russell hs said he's heard a number of stories about Chase, outside the field, that he said he knows this team is concerned about.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

As for Ron always brings back the players after big seasons.  I don't think the point applies to this because the circumstances are miles different.  This time its a roster building question. 

 

Keim mentioned years ago, the SF method of eventually trading one if their 4 big time D lineman -- and suggested that its something that has been at least discussed in that FO.

 

Keim as in most things is typically on the money.  He said last year they wanted Payne back even before the big season he had versus trading him.  I don't get the vibe from him or anyone else that covers the team that this team for sure plans to break the mold and have like  90 million of their cap dedicated to the D line by having basically four 20 plus million dollar men at that spot.  Its part of the reason why they wanted to throw some darts at this spot in the draft.

 

I'd think we should at least 50-50 expect one of these guys ultimately to go.  Terry coming back or whomever has zero to do with this.    It's do they want to break the mold of going nuts money wise on one unit.  And while it looks like they will flirt with the idea as to have three D lineman in the 20 million range, they are unlikely going to go with 4.   Not saying they've ruled it out based on what I've heard but it doesn't feel at all like they are leaning on signing all 4 on big contracts.

 

One thing that a beat guy mentioned is they could let Allen go in lets say 2 years where his guaranteed money runs out.  So it doesn't have to be Chase or Montez.  But I get a strong vibe that if they had to pick Chase or Montez right now they'd pick Montez -- aside from health issues but also because of supposedly better maturity.  But they also know that Ron loves Allen so that might be unlikely.

 

Personally, I still think Chase has greatness in him.  And if these stories are right, Ron is doing the right thing by making him play for a contract.   High ceiling player -- maybe that will spur him reaching that high ceiling.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

10 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

If Chase plays like his hair is on fire we are gonna be a very, very good defense and probably a very good team. They'd likely not trade him then, especially with a lame duck coaching staff that needs a winning season. He's also one of the teams most marketable players which will help draw interest in the team. I think they'd be more likely to re-sign him than trade him if he lights it up the 1st half of this coming season. I think Chase Young is one of the biggest keys to our upcoming season, just behind Howell/Brissett.

 

Maybe then its Sweat.  The point isn't about Chase in a vacuum.  It's just judging by what some beat guys said if they had to lose one of the four right now, they believe Chase would be the one they'd most likely let go -- and some of that reason has nothing to do with on the field performance.

 

I know some here think it doesn't matter to pay 90 million or so to one unit.   A great player is a great player and who cares if money is slanted big time at one spot ultinmately at the expense of other spots?  I get the mindset but its far from no brainer territory.  Plenty think its a bit crazy -- heck the PFF cap guy thinks it would be absolutely nuts to dedicate such a lopsided number in today's NFL to that unit and would ridicule them if they did.   They aren't alone on that. 

 

Doesn't matter that some cap geek types think its silly for them to do it.  I am getting the sense that some in the FO don't love the idea either or understand its unconventional and are mulling about playing that card versus not or at a minimum would consider doing what SF did. 

 

So, the idea that they would SF style trade one of their assets on that unit versus paying big money for four D lineman at a minimum I gather is a thought process with this FO.   So for all those ruling it out.  My impression is I wouldn't do that. I think its a possibility.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[DWinzit]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Maybe then its Sweat.  The point isn't about Chase in a vacuum.  It's just judging by what some beat guys said if they had to lose one of the four right now, they believe Chase would be the one they'd most likely let go -- and some of that reason has nothing to do with on the field performance.

 

I know some here think it doesn't matter to pay 90 million or so to one unit.   A great player is a great player and who cares if money is slanted big time at one spot ultinmately at the expense of other spots?  I get the mindset but its far from no brainer territory.  Plenty think its a bit crazy -- heck the PFF cap guy thinks it would be absolutely nuts to dedicate such a lopsided number in today's NFL to that unit and would ridicule them if they did.   They aren't alone on that. 

 

Doesn't matter that some cap geek types think its silly for them to do it.  I am getting the sense that some in the FO don't love the idea either or at a minimum would consider doing what SF did. 

 

So, the idea that they would SF style trade one of their assets on that unit versus paying big money for four D lineman at a minimum I gather is a thought process with this FO.   So for all those ruling it out.  My impression is I wouldn't do that. I think its a possibility.

I would think if they wanted to move Sweat, they would have put feelers out before the draft. He is coming off a good year with a year remaining. Good scenario for a trade partner.

[Skinsinparadise]

8 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

I would think if they wanted to move Sweat, they would have put feelers out before the draft. He is coming off a good year with a year remaining. Good scenario for a trade partner.

 

According to Keim they ideally don't want to trade Sweat.  The dude who feels like the wildcard would be Chase Young.  If Chase burns it up though wonder if they'd change their mind and want to deal Sweat.  But I get the vibe they aren't so convinced Chase burns it up so if it happens it happens.  lol, I'd love to know what the stories are about Chase but the bottom line is they like Allen-Payne in the locker room. 

 

They believe Sweat has matured a lot in the last season and change.  And Chase right now feels like the outlier.  And I don't enjoy saying this at all.  lol. @volsmet made fun of me that year before the draft about all my Chase Young worshipping.    I've defended Chase for years here.  Big fan of the player.  But I am getting the vibe I was wrong about selling his intangibles.  On the intangibles front looks like they are very sold on the other three D lineman and Chase is a question mark at best.

 

Not just Ron Rivera, Dan Snyder doesn't play in the sandbox of trading assets.  That's what Belichick used to do.  the Eagles have done.  And some other teams.  But I get the vibe that its a sandbox that Josh Harris plays in.  so lets say if we go 3-6 before the trading deadline and they can move an asset -- Harris might push Rivera to do it even though it doesn't help Rivera in a win now season.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[DWinzit]

I definitely see the new group playing in the sandbox. Any good manager is going to want to use any and all means to improve their assets.

 

I was never in favor of drafting Chase and was bashed for those statements. Heard all those...Chase is a generational player stuff. I felt we could have loaded up with talent filling all those holes it ironically seems we are still trying to fill, lol.  The better season he has, the better the trade opportunity unless you go the recent Washington way...tag him next year then receive a comp pick

 

Besides, you know me, I have always been a big Montez guy. And it is nice that he did mature with being better with contain. 

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

  so lets say if we go 3-6 before the trading deadline and they can move an asset -- Harris might push Rivera to do it even though it doesn't help Rivera in a win now season.

 

This would be a disastrous sign of things to come with this ownership group if this happened.  The one non negotiable rule that this ownership group needs to follow is to never meddle with how our football people run their culture, locker room, and football machine.  Even highly meddlesome owners like Jerry Jones don't get involved with the in-serason management of the roster that you describe here.

[kingdaddy]

50 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Maybe then its Sweat.  The point isn't about Chase in a vacuum.  It's just judging by what some beat guys said if they had to lose one of the four right now, they believe Chase would be the one they'd most likely let go -- and some of that reason has nothing to do with on the field performance.

 

I know some here think it doesn't matter to pay 90 million or so to one unit.   A great player is a great player and who cares if money is slanted big time at one spot ultinmately at the expense of other spots?  I get the mindset but its far from no brainer territory.  Plenty think its a bit crazy -- heck the PFF cap guy thinks it would be absolutely nuts to dedicate such a lopsided number in today's NFL to that unit and would ridicule them if they did.   They aren't alone on that. 

 

Doesn't matter that some cap geek types think its silly for them to do it.  I am getting the sense that some in the FO don't love the idea either or understand its unconventional and are mulling about playing that card versus not or at a minimum would consider doing what SF did. 

 

So, the idea that they would SF style trade one of their assets on that unit versus paying big money for four D lineman at a minimum I gather is a thought process with this FO.   So for all those ruling it out.  My impression is I wouldn't do that. I think its a possibility.

I agree you are probably right, and it looks like they've drafted to set up that plan. Maybe whomever gets them the most in return out of all four of them is the one who goes? Reminds me of when New England traded Richard Seymour to Oakland for a 1st round pick.

[skinny21]

25 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

This would be a disastrous sign of things to come with this ownership group if this happened.  The one non negotiable rule that this ownership group needs to follow is to never meddle with how our football people run their culture, locker room, and football machine.  Even highly meddlesome owners like Jerry Jones don't get involved with the in-serason management of the roster that you describe here.

I hear you on this, but it’s also a unique situation - not only new owner, but Ron both (likely/potentially) on the hot seat and him wearing the GM hat as well.  In other words, if they only did it this one time purely due to the unique circumstances… I’d see less of an issue.

[formerly4skins]

On 5/18/2023 at 5:12 AM, Going Commando said:

 

This would be a disastrous sign of things to come with this ownership group if this happened.  The one non negotiable rule that this ownership group needs to follow is to never meddle with how our football people run their culture, locker room, and football machine.  Even highly meddlesome owners like Jerry Jones don't get involved with the in-serason management of the roster that you describe here.

 

I don't know, I think there's a huge difference between a new owner coming in, getting the lay of the land,

 

(@formerly4skins, mod edit rule 13 violation but no penalty applied. It's a normal enough phrase but this our "family friendly" forum and some young'uns do read here sometimes so we try to keep it clean🙂)

 

cleaning house, and getting things straight...as opposed to a constantly meddling ass-hat like Dan.

 

Harris kind of has to be more hands on year-one to get his people in place. 

 

And, it would be a nice sign that the idiotic "coach-centric" management structure we've suffered through is being dismantled.

 

Why let a "win now" Ron hold assets hostage and hamstring future decision makers?

[Going Commando]

35 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

I hear you on this, but it’s also a unique situation - not only new owner, but Ron both (likely/potentially) on the hot seat and him wearing the GM hat as well.  In other words, if they only did it this one time purely due to the unique circumstances… I’d see less of an issue.

 

No I don't think an owner meddling with the roster in-season is ever OK, because it's the single most destructive thing an owner can do to the organization's culture.  There have to be clear and incontrovertible lines between ownership and the football people where the football people get to run their shop as they need to.  If ownership doesn't like the way the football people are running their shop, then they can fire them and hire new people to run the shop.  But they should never be stepping in to run it when they feel like they know better.  The organization's culture matters infinitely more than any kind of valuation disagreement over one or two players trade stock.

 

Besides, do you all really think the Harris group knows more about managing players and team building assets than Rivera's regime?  Not a ****ing chance.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Do we have data showing coach centric models are idiotic?

 

Some of the more successful teams have been. Patriots are the obvious example. Seahawks are as well. I'm sure there have been failures in this method (like any method), but at least some successes do exist.

 

Mike Shanahan and Ron Rivera were/are supposedly coach centric with extra power. Yet we knew with hindsight that Mike Shanahan was overridden constantly. Rumors about Snyder interfering too much for Rivera to actually be coach centric.

 

I think I'm probably a bit out of the loop regarding the rumors of Snyder meddling. 2020 draft and 2022 off-season he probably meddled. But not sure of 2021 off-season.

[philibusters]

27 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

No I don't think an owner meddling with the roster in-season is ever OK, because it's the single most destructive thing an owner can do to the organization's culture.  There have to be clear and incontrovertible lines between ownership and the football people where the football people get to run their shop as they need to.  If ownership doesn't like the way the football people are running their shop, then they can fire them and hire new people to run the shop.  But they should never be stepping in to run it when they feel like they know better.  The organization's culture matters infinitely more than any kind of valuation disagreement over one or two players trade stock.

 

Besides, do you all really think the Harris group knows more about managing players and team building assets than Rivera's regime?  Not a ****ing chance.

 

What is your take on what happened in Houston with the draft.  Supposedly the GM was not sold on Stroud (or any of Stroud, Richardson, or Levis), but ownership wanted to take a QB, so they took Stroud, but then traded up (and probably paid too much) for the third pick to take the GM's preferred player.

 

I put that on the GM myself.  To me a QB offseason decision is a big picture decision that is in the owner's portfolio of decision making and when he overruled the GM, the GM just needs to accept it.  I thought they way overpaid for the third pick and I put that on the GM.

Edited May 18, 2023 by philibusters

[method man]

54 minutes ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

Do we have data showing coach centric models are idiotic?

 

Some of the more successful teams have been. Patriots are the obvious example. Seahawks are as well. I'm sure there have been failures in this method (like any method), but at least some successes do exist.

 

Mike Shanahan and Ron Rivera were/are supposedly coach centric with extra power. Yet we knew with hindsight that Mike Shanahan was overridden constantly. Rumors about Snyder interfering too much for Rivera to actually be coach centric.

 

I think I'm probably a bit out of the loop regarding the rumors of Snyder meddling. 2020 draft and 2022 off-season he probably meddled. But not sure of 2021 off-season.

He probably did meddle in 2021 too. What has been reported is only a fraction of the meddling he has done over the years. Let’s blame WJ3 on him

2 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

This would be a disastrous sign of things to come with this ownership group if this happened.  The one non negotiable rule that this ownership group needs to follow is to never meddle with how our football people run their culture, locker room, and football machine.  Even highly meddlesome owners like Jerry Jones don't get involved with the in-serason management of the roster that you describe here.

It’s not a healthy long term setup but I could see Harris having a reported or unreported senior football consultant who advises him this season and has influence behind the scenes. There would also be something of an FO vacuum if Harris fires Rivera early in the season. I certainly would not want lame ducks in Mayhew and Hurney making decisions

Edited May 18, 2023 by method man

[Going Commando]

32 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

What is your take on what happened in Houston with the draft.  Supposedly the GM was not sold on Stroud (or any of Stroud, Richardson, or Levis), but ownership wanted to take a QB, so they took Stroud, but then traded up (and probably paid too much) for the third pick to take the GM's preferred player.

 

I put that on the GM myself.  To me a QB offseason decision is a big picture decision that is in the owner's portfolio of decision making and when he overruled the GM, the GM just needs to accept it.  I thought they way overpaid for the third pick and I put that on the GM.

 

I don't really know what happened in Houston, and I would be suspicious of anyone who makes definitive claims about the consensus of Houston's draft room.  Things are never cut and dry.  I will say that I think it's a brewing disaster when an owner mandates a particular QB be picked over the objections of his football people.  That QB is gonna have no chance to develop properly.

 

But I also think it's idiotic for the football people to ignore the QB position when they need one.

 

Offseason decisions about QB require the backing of ownership because they are ultimately one of the biggest business decision that franchises make.  But owners should not be picking the QBs for their football people.  It's more about the FO people making a choice and then getting ownership to sign off on it/understand the timeline of development that it's going to take to work out.  Ownership can demand a concrete plan, but the plan needs to come from the football people.

[skinny21]

35 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

No I don't think an owner meddling with the roster in-season is ever OK, because it's the single most destructive thing an owner can do to the organization's culture.  There have to be clear and incontrovertible lines between ownership and the football people where the football people get to run their shop as they need to.  If ownership doesn't like the way the football people are running their shop, then they can fire them and hire new people to run the shop.  But they should never be stepping in to run it when they feel like they know better.  The organization's culture matters infinitely more than any kind of valuation disagreement over one or two players trade stock.

Again, totally hear you.  I am not in favor of ownership interfering pretty much whatsoever beyond hiring/firing the GM (or President, if that person is the one overseeing the GM).  If the plan is to bring in their own GM next offseason though, regardless of whether Rivera is retained as the coach, I don’t see is as the normal interference you’re referring to.  I can see the argument that if they did it this once, they might do it again in the future… that’s fair.

 

If I look at sort of the inverse - if Ron decided he wanted to trade Young before the trade deadline, I’d have no real problem with Harris saying no because he believed that is something his chosen GM should have a say in next offseason… as long as he isn’t overruling his own chosen GM down the line at any point (on football matters).  

Or, let’s say Ron changed his mind and decided he wanted to extend Sweat and Chase this summer.  I can certainly understand Harris saying no - thinking it’s not smart to saddle his future GM with those contracts.  Not to mention it might make the job a tougher sell to prospective GMs.

 

As I said, it’s a unique situation, but I respect if you don’t see it that way… that’s cool - to each their own.

 

I will say that I appreciate that Ron seems intent on not mortgaging the future; he seems genuine in his desire to set things up for next year and beyond, even knowing he might not be around.  That goes a long way in terms of trusting his decisions.

 

 

35 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

Besides, do you all really think the Harris group knows more about managing players and team building assets than Rivera's regime?  Not a ****ing chance.

Very unlikely, I agree.  Yet ownership is more likely to have the longer term in mind than anyone in the Rivera FO (though RR is showing he’s still focused on sustainability, so maybe it’s a push).  I’d also guess it wouldn’t be a decision made in a vacuum arbitrarily by Harris - he’d likely consult with potential GMs, ex-GMs or whoever… including the current FO.

[MartinC]

32 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

It's more about the FO people making a choice and then getting ownership to sign off on it/understand the timeline of development that it's going to take to work out.  Ownership can demand a concrete plan, but the plan needs to come from the football people.

 

 

If I was an NFL owner and my franchise lacked a solution at QB when my GM came to me with the offseason plan and said "We don't like the options available at QB at the top of the draft' my response would be 'Fine, thats your call and I am not going to override you. But I do want to know what your plan is for the QB position because without one we cant win - and if we don't start winning I will have to make changes. Starting with you."

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

This would be a disastrous sign of things to come with this ownership group if this happened.  The one non negotiable rule that this ownership group needs to follow is to never meddle with how our football people run their culture, locker room, and football machine.  Even highly meddlesome owners like Jerry Jones don't get involved with the in-serason management of the roster that you describe here.

 

Agree in general.  But not in this context.  This isn't their coaching staff or their FO.  Further on point, based on what I've read I doubt Rivera as the HC or more on a point a coach centric run FO is up Harris' alley

 

But even if I didn't think that way.  There was a report this off season from Russini that one of the prospective ownership groups approached Sean Payton about coming here.  Some scoffed at that report.  But Sean Payton later on said that was indeed true.  It's not been hard to piece together that the ownership group that she talked to was almost for sure the Harris group. 

 

So if I am Harris and Rivera goes for a bad start of the season round 4 and i am already strongly leaning towards him being gone in a month or two -- i don't know if I let Rivera have me by the balls to allow him to do whatever he wants to try to do to salvage a win now season even if its not the best for this team's future.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Warhead36]

I think the GM being the total boss is a bit of a myth we've conjured up. Andy Reid has said many times he and Brett Veach are basically like partners. Ditto Kyle Shanahan and John Lynch and the list goes on and on.

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, skinny21 said:

I hear you on this, but it’s also a unique situation - not only new owner, but Ron both (likely/potentially) on the hot seat and him wearing the GM hat as well.  In other words, if they only did it this one time purely due to the unique circumstances… I’d see less of an issue.

 

Agree.  I'd add, the odds are good that the coaching staff and FO would have been blown up if the sale happened earlier.

 

Many of us talked a lot about this at the time on the sale thread but not so much lately -- but the Sean Payton story almost had to be Harris. 

 

Bezos wasn't serious enough about buying this team and is too reclusive to have conversations with sports reporters about intentions like that.  Steven A. wasn't really talked about as a buyer back then and he doesn't seem that in the mix of things.

 

Who was the prospective owner who was hot for the team who is already in the miox of the sports media?  Harris.  And heck when Russini was pushed as to who she thought buys the team -- she said Harris.  I'd say at least 90 percent chance it was Harris' group that approached Sean Payton.

 

Based on what I've read about Harris, I'd bet he will likely Rivera as a dude but i'd be surprised if he thinks he's the guy to take this time to the promised land.

 

So i am guessing Rivera and the FO are on borrowed time.