GM first?

[soapman]

Just curious(again). Why can't a coach pick his GM? You mean to tell me that if we had say a chance to land a Andy Reid or Bellicheat (just examples don't slay me) that you would rather get the GM first over a proven coach and let them select the GM? Knowing our FO we bring in a cheap alternative to a real GM and no real coach wants to coach under him. Discuss.

[HAMMER]

Re: GM first?

Cart before the horse.

[soapman]

Re: GM first?

Cart before the horse.

That's not an answer.

[baalworship]

Re: GM first?

I agree with you, to an extent. The main advantage of picking a GM first is that I would rather have the chain of command rest with the personnel guy over the coach.

If you pick the coach first, your average NFL coach will have a myopic view of the draft and take players that he needs now and not worry as much about 2 years, 3 years down the road. Belichick is the exception in that he can put off picks for a year if he thinks it's a net positive.

[PECKERWOOD]

Re: GM first?

In many cases, a GM won't come here unless a certain coach is hired or vice versa. Really, it just depends on how it all plays out.

[soapman]

Re: GM first?

I agree with you, to an extent. The main advantage of picking a GM first is that I would rather have the chain of command rest with the personnel guy over the coach.

If you pick the coach first, your average NFL coach will have a myopic view of the draft and take players that he needs now and not worry as much about 2 years, 3 years down the road. Belichick is the exception in that he can put off picks for a year if he thinks it's a net positive.

Agreed. On some teams the GM's put all the pieces together and make it easy for the coach. Any dummy can come in and win or the gm fires them. But what about teams (like 06 NE, 09 NYG, MIA, and DEN) that have mediocre teams at best and great coaches that make the team into a contender. You're telling me that having a GM in place should preclude getting a great coach?

[soapman]

Re: GM first?

In many cases, a GM won't come here unless a certain coach is hired or vice versa. Really, it just depends on how it all plays out.

Thatn makes sense to me. So why is it that alot of zoneys are saying the team doesn't get it when they are going after coaches and not GMs?

[trapezeus]

Re: GM first?

my guess on why you want a GM first is because rarely does the GM/coach as one person work out. it's too much to scout college players and free agents, put together a winning strategy, and overlook the D and O and ST.

So if you buy that that doesn't work, you normally need to get a GM who is good at building a team. he has to get players that he think will fit a certain scheme. He has a leg up on the type of players he looks for. He knows which players to take out of the draft. He knows from his experience those guys who just say the right things versus the guy who will leave it all on the field. He also has a type of coach that he thinks can get the most out of those players with schemes that fit the personell he's bringing in.

If you get the coach first, and pair him with a GM that he doesn't like or doesn't see eye to eye on, you'll have a power struggle. you'll have the GM saying, "im getting good players, he just doesn't get anything out of him." and you'll have a coach saying, "this guy doesn't get me my guys."

That's the worst case scenario. more likely, the GM won't be able to provide the right players to the coach handcuffing the team. Look at this years bills team on how that works out. They have more project players and players who aren't really good for the system, stuck on a team with coaches who don't really like any other systems. So it's a total mismatch and you see the results on the field.

So the old theory is that the GM is the old wise guy who builds up the scouting department and he gets a coach that he can work with. The dialogue is open both ways and they work together.

Putting a coach first and then getting a weak untested GM will get you a weak scouting department. we already have that.

[jamze132]

Re: GM first?

Usually the GM is hired before the coach becuse the GM is the boss of the coach.

There is this little thing called "chain of command".

[soapman]

Re: GM first?

Usually the GM is hired before the coach becuse the GM is the boss of the coach.

There is this little thing called "chain of command".

Didn't Mangini just get his GM fired?

[DraftBoy]

Re: GM first?

Didn't Mangini just get his GM fired?

And he'll be next to be fired as well.

[Pinkerton Security]

Re: GM first?

Well my personal view on it is that our current GM is a complete idiot and I'd rather get a real GM in here to pick a coach, because odds are I'd trust their judgment before our current GM's...and if the GM we bring in AFTER we hire a coach doesnt like said coach, it may be a waste of time and money because the GM could easily fire that coach if he doesnt perform well, and we'd be setting back our players another year.

[Ginger Vitis]

Re: GM first?

For future reference.. it's fascination

[jamze132]

Re: GM first?

Didn't Mangini just get his GM fired?

Good try, but no.

Holmgren ain't keepin' no Mangini around.

[Night Train]

Re: GM first?

A coach can arrive in a package deal with a GM he can work with... but this team needs a GM/VP type to come in, fire Modrak and Guy and go through each office and evalute any weak spots. Then move on to reshaping this roster, which will take time.

A real housecleaning is needed, contrary to many who think all we need is a famous coach and an overrated QB in Round 1. I have a shiny toy for those people, which should keep them distracted for 5 years..