If Jim Fassel had a bad interview, why doesn't TD interview him again?

[Michael82]

http://www.rochesterdandc.com/sports/bills/01118A2TN4A_sports.shtml


The word is that Fassel, battling a cold and feeling fatigued, didn’t interview well last Tuesday. Well, pump him up with Tylenol and get him back in.

I was reading this article in the Democrat & Chronocle and I gotta agree with it. Why not give him another shot? IMO, the interview process should NOT decide the head coach. Look where it got us last time. Gregg Williams? :shakeno: Look at experience. Look at what he has done in his career, and also look at the interview. If he was feeling sick and tired during the interview...why not test it out? Give him another shot. If he still doesn't impress you, then you can toss him aside. But doesn't everybody deserve a second chance? We gave RJ so many chances and also Gregg Williams got chance after chance in Buffalo. I think the same thing should happen to Fassel.

[Michael82]

Oh and this quote also makes me really interested in Fassel...


The fact his Giants lost their final eight games last season, even losing to the Bills, is cause to pause but anybody can have one miserable year. The guy produced three playoff teams and a Super Bowl participant in the six seasons before that.

Until the bottom fell out in 2003, Fassel was 19-5 in December, best in the NFL in that span; 31-14-1 in the division; and his team’s turnover differential was plus-23, ninth best. And while the Bills desperately could use his offensive prowess, his Giants teams also valued defense with 267 sacks and 99.4 yards rushing allowed heading into last fall. His teams were also 41-5 when leading after three quarters.

Two more points: Fassel would bring along one of the league’s two or three best offensive-line coaches, Buffalo native Jim McNally, and he’s used to working with strong GMs (Ernie Accorsi in New York), no small factor in the Donahoe equation.

[Dozerdog]

Depends on why it was a bad interview.

If he gave bad answers and bad contract demands- screw him.

[Michael82]

Originally posted by Dozerdog
Depends on why it was a bad interview.

If he gave bad answers and bad contract demands- screw him.

Yeah, but if he acted out of it and sounded crappy...give him another shot. Only Donahoe knows what happened, but the fact that it was only 5 hours and he had a cold, I think he deserves another shot.

[justasportsfan]

Originally posted by Mike32282


Yeah, but if he acted out of it and sounded crappy...give him another shot. Only Donahoe knows what happened, but the fact that it was only 5 hours and he had a cold, I think he deserves another shot. He should've gotten a snot , a shot of tequilla would've cleared his colds.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by Mike32282
IMO, the interview process should NOT decide the head coach.

I couldn't disagree more. You narrow down the field pre-interview to the people that, from a distance, you feel are most qualified. After that, you select whoever interviewed the best (same with hiring people for any job, you scan through the resumes, find the best candidates, then pretty much whoever has the best interview gets the job). If person A has a better interview than person B, but person B gets the job ... why even bother interviewing person A in the first place? (exception in the case of NFL hiring being that A might be a quota fill-in).

[The_Philster]

The scary thing about that is...Williams interviewed the best the last time. :eek:

[The Spaz]

Originally posted by HenryRules


I couldn't disagree more. You narrow down the field pre-interview to the people that, from a distance, you feel are most qualified. After that, you select whoever interviewed the best (same with hiring people for any job, you scan through the resumes, find the best candidates, then pretty much whoever has the best interview gets the job). If person A has a better interview than person B, but person B gets the job ... why even bother interviewing person A in the first place? (exception in the case of NFL hiring being that A might be a quota fill-in).

Oh really then you like the way that TD does his interview process then. Donohoe completely was :drool: over Gegg Williams interview. Then why do you also say TD has analysis paralysis?

[TigerJ]

If the D and C is right, then yes, I'd like to see him get another shot. I've also heard that he was unprofessional and unprepared both for this interview and an interview for at least one other team. I know from experience that rumors can get started that have no basis in reality, so I can concede that it's possible Fassel's interview problems were due to no fault of his own. The question is, how do we ever know for certain what happened?

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by The_Philster
The scary thing about that is...Williams interviewed the best the last time. :eek:

What scares me about that is that if this becomes a pattern, it means that Donahoe is a bad interviewer. Interviewing people is as much a skill as anything else.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by The Spaz


Oh really then you like the way that TD does his interview process then. Donohoe completely was :drool: over Gegg Williams interview. Then why do you also say TD has analysis paralysis?

I said that if TD needs to talk to every candidate a second time he will be suffering from analysis paralysis - meaning that he is spending way too much time poring over the decision instead of actually making the decision. There comes a time when you have to **** or get off the pot. Asking one or two people back for 2nd interviews is ok.

I don't know what TD's interview process is, and to base my like/dislike of that process on one result would be ridiculous. I wasn't there in the interviews, I don't know what was said, I don't know how Gregg acted, so how the hell can I judge TD's interview process on that one fact.

Peter Lynch picked bad stocks once in a while, Babe Ruth struck out a lot, Roger Clemens lost a game once in a while, Emmitt Smith fumbled the ball occasionally ... forming an opinion on a single bad act is going way overboard.

[The_Philster]

Originally posted by HenryRules
What scares me about that is that if this becomes a pattern, it means that Donahoe is a bad interviewer. Interviewing people is as much a skill as anything else.

Couldn't agree more. So far, the only things he's really proven here are that he can manage the cap and still bring in talent. Hiring a good coach is also a must for any GM/President.

[Michael82]

Originally posted by The_Philster
The scary thing about that is...Williams interviewed the best the last time. :eek:

EXACTLY! He wowed the hell out of him! I'd be worried about the next coach that impresses the hell out of Donahoe because of his organization and lists and all that. That is EXACTLY what got Gregg Williams the job in the first place.The funny thing is....Gregg Williams' coaching was the exact opposite of his interview. Unorganized, Undisciplined, bad assistant coaches. We don't want ANOTHER Gregg again...right?

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by The_Philster


Couldn't agree more.

Wow ... we agree on something. Who woudda thunk it.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by Mike32282


EXACTLY! He wowed the hell out of him! I'd be worried about the next coach that impresses the hell out of Donahoe because of his organization and lists and all that. That is EXACTLY what got Gregg Williams the job in the first place.The funny thing is....Gregg Williams' coaching was the exact opposite of his interview. Unorganized, Undesciplined, bad assistant coaches. We don't want ANOTHER Gregg again...right?

So what ... we hire whoever interviews the worst??

Nope, you adjust your style of interviewing, hope you made the right adjustments, and then hire whoever does the best interview.

[The_Philster]

Originally posted by HenryRules
Wow ... we agree on something. Who woudda thunk it.

Scary ain't it. :eek:
Maybe I should rethink this. :lol:
:ontome:

[The_Philster]

Originally posted by HenryRules
So what ... we hire whoever interviews the worst??

Nope, you adjust your style of interviewing, hope you made the right adjustments, and then hire whoever does the best interview.
And maybe have some extra people helping to conduct the interview...like Modrak or Ralph.

[HenryRules]

By the way, what happens tomorrow night that will make the Bills sign their next HC?

[Michael82]

Originally posted by HenryRules
By the way, what happens tomorrow night that will make the Bills sign their next HC?

LOL! Nothing...I just keep changing this damn countdown timer until it get closer. :D

[Michael82]

Hey, I can dream...can't I? :D

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by Mike32282
We gave RJ so many chances and also Gregg Williams got chance after chance in Buffalo. I think the same thing should happen to Fassel.

Why should the Bills handling of RJ and Gregg be a model for the way they do things in the future? I'm not saying they should do the opposite, I just mean that neither one is a great case study for producing a solid team.

[Dozerdog]

Mike-

Your logic never ceases to amaze me.

[Michael82]

Originally posted by Dozerdog
Mike-

Your logic never ceases to amaze me.

That's my goal. :snicker:

[Dozerdog]

I conduct or sit in on 20 odd interviews a year in my line of work.

I can't tell you how many very qualified people who don't interview well never get a second chance. They dress wrong, show up late, or just have a bad day. Many never get the second chance.

On the other hand, some folks will have fantastic interviews, (1st and second interviews) we give them a job and they flop miserably. Some will tell you what you want to hear or give you the right answers- but when it comes to real life- they fail to deliver.

he's 50-50 hiring a coach. Cower has to be labled a huge success considering he's defied pro sports odds and is still there 11 years after the fact.(109-66-1, 8 playoff years) If he used the same blueprint and hired GW, is it the process? Is it TD? Or was it just GW looking good on paper but failing in action?

[socalfan]

The ability to make a good hire depends on the interviewer. If he/she has the ability to discern ability then they do better than flipping a coin. If they don't then they are left trying to figure out if the person dresses appropriately, gave the wanted answer or delivered in the past.

[HenryRules]

Originally posted by socalfan
The ability to make a good hire depends on the interviewer. If he/she has the ability to discern ability then they do better than flipping a coin. If they don't then they are left trying to figure out if the person dresses appropriately, gave the wanted answer or delivered in the past.

I've interviewed many people and have also watched other people interview as well. I can tell you one thing that I have observed: depending on the job you are interviewing for, how someone dresses is an absolutely amazing indicator as to the dedication/professionalism of that person. How someone carries themselves (including the way they dress, the way they answer questions, and they way they respond to questioning - aside from the content of their answers) is the most accurate (and easiest) way to determine a persons character during an interview.

[Dozerdog]

Originally posted by socalfan
The ability to make a good hire depends on the interviewer. If he/she has the ability to discern ability then they do better than flipping a coin. If they don't then they are left trying to figure out if the person dresses appropriately, gave the wanted answer or delivered in the past.


It has to do with the quality of the person interviewed. You can have the world's greatest interviewer - but it's not his job to pull the information out of the prospect ...only to evaluate the info presented.

But I've interviewed people who might have the book smarts to do the job- but lack complete common sense. Our line of work requires large doses of both

[socalfan]

Originally posted by HenryRules
....... I can tell you one thing that I have observed: depending on the job you are interviewing for........


Originally posted by Dozerdog
......to evaluate the info presented.

But I've interviewed people who might have the book smarts to do the job- but lack complete common sense. Our line of work requires large doses of both


Both of you guys just made my points..... you have to be able to discern, evaluate the candidate etc.