Jump to content

Joe Douglas and the card game "Go Fish".


clayton163v
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wrote this in another thread and decided it deserved its own.

OK, here it is.  NFL general managing is like playing "Go Fish" with playing cards.  It really is a good analogy.

Your turn arrives.  You have to wisely determine what you want and decide which is the priority since you only get one turn.  If you succeed, you get to go  again.  If you fail - in the NFL you have to find what you want in the draft of free agency.  Both of which are highly random events.  The NFL GM gets a turn every day.  He picks during the draft and free agency.  He is given the same resources each year as the other GMs, just like "Go Fish".

An NFL GM must use each turn wisely.  In "Go Fish" you do not pick a card - that happens when you fail - you ask your opponents if they have what you want.  You must guess what they have and whether you - or they - value it.  While this is more art than science, a simple empirical measurement of RESULTS can see how your GM plays "Go Fish".   Which is to say,  improving the quality of your incoming cards and getting more of them is how the game is played.  You do not win at "Go Fish" by getting lucky draws from the deck.   You win by making requests of the other GMs and making accurate assessments about your opponents resources.   Just like "Go Fish".

Picking cards - the draft and free agency - are random events.  We may hate to admit it.  But they are. 

Blaming the GM for a failure to obtain positive results from the random event is illogical.  That is the trough of justice.  Blaming the GM for poor use of his daily turn is fair game.  That is his job.   To win, you must do better than random chance.

Is there a single person on this entire board who will say that Douglas has played "Go Fish" poorly?  He is the best GM in the NFL.  And sooner or later the odds will prevail and that means wins.   Joe keeps obtaining extra picks and improving the quality of the  ones we have.  And he has done it while digging out of the worst salary cap hole in the entire league.   Unlike the other teams in salary cap hell like the perennial contending Saints - we had nothing to show for all that cash.   Neither good young players nor recent winning seasons. 

Many Jet fans complain: "yeah, yeah, yeah (someone will post this - lol), so we won the draft again.  Wake me when we win the division." 

I argue that we never won the draft.  Again and again we deluded ourselves into believing that we won the draft.  To "WIN" the draft, the GM must win the 365 turns leading up to the day the cards get picked and to win in free agency the same rule applies.  That never happened.  You're imagining it.  But it has been happening since we hired Joe Douglas.  

He has been putting on a command performance and we are better than we were.   The odds fellas.  The odds.  Joe keeps playing them.  Sooner or later we will hit BINGO with the random events. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Thumb Down 2
  • WTF? 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Blaming the GM for a failure to obtain positive results from the random event is illogical.

If this were true, then wouldn't it follow that giving him credit for obtaining a positive result from a random event would also be illogical?

The all feels like a really heavy lift to defend "the best GM in the league's" career 6-27 record "command performance" (or his 13-36 if you give him credit for the final Gase season) with a very flimsy "it's all random" argument.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, clayton163v said:

I wrote this in another thread and decided it deserved its own.

OK, here it is.  NFL general managing is like playing "Go Fish" with playing cards.  It really is a good analogy.

Your turn arrives.  You have to wisely determine what you want and decide which is the priority since you only get one turn.  If you succeed, you get to go  again.  If you fail - in the NFL you have to find what you want in the draft of free agency.  Both of which are highly random events.  The NFL GM gets a turn every day.  He picks during the draft and free agency.  He is given the same resources each year as the other GMs, just like "Go Fish".

An NFL GM must use each turn wisely.  In "Go Fish" you do not pick a card - that happens when you fail - you ask your opponents if they have what you want.  You must guess what they have and whether you - or they - value it.  While this is more art than science, a simple empirical measurement of RESULTS can see how your GM plays "Go Fish".   Which is to say,  improving the quality of your incoming cards and getting more of them is how the game is played.  You do not win at "Go Fish" by getting lucky draws from the deck.   You win by making requests of the other GMs and making accurate assessments about your opponents resources.   Just like "Go Fish".

Picking cards - the draft and free agency - are random events.  We may hate to admit it.  But they are. 

Blaming the GM for a failure to obtain positive results from the random event is illogical.  That is the trough of justice.  Blaming the GM for poor use of his daily turn is fair game.  That is his job.   To win, you must do better than random chance.

Is there a single person on this entire board who will say that Douglas has played "Go Fish" poorly?  He is the best GM in the NFL.  And sooner or later the odds will prevail and that means wins.   Joe keeps obtaining extra picks and improving the quality of the  ones we have.  And he has done it while digging out of the worst salary cap hole in the entire league.   Unlike the other teams in salary cap hell like the perennial contending Saints - we had nothing to show for all that cash.   Neither good young players nor recent winning seasons. 

Many Jet fans complain: "yeah, yeah, yeah (someone will post this - lol), so we won the draft again.  Wake me when we win the division." 

I argue that we never won the draft.  Again and again we deluded ourselves into believing that we won the draft.  To "WIN" the draft, the GM must win the 365 turns leading up to the day the cards get picked and to win in free agency the same rule applies.  That never happened.  You're imagining it.  But it has been happening since we hired Joe Douglas.  

He has been putting on a command performance and we are better than we were.   The odds fellas.  The odds.  Joe keeps playing them.  Sooner or later we will hit BINGO with the random events. 

When a team cuts a player, don't they have to tell the rest of the league?  I'm missing the relevance of the entire "Go Fish" metaphor, since all of the (figurative) cards are face up on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, clayton163v said:

I wrote this in another thread and decided it deserved its own.

Picking cards - the draft and free agency - are random events.  We may hate to admit it.  But they are. 

 

The draft and free agency are scheduled events.  The meteor that killed the dinosaurs was a random event. The draft and free agency killing the jets doesn’t make them random events.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Warfish said:

 

If this were true, then wouldn't it follow that giving him credit for obtaining a positive result from a random event would also be illogical?

The all feels like a really heavy lift to defend "the best GM in the league's" career 6-27 record "command performance" (or his 13-36 if you give him credit for the final Gase season) with a very flimsy "it's all random" argument.

 

 

Yes.

And that's also correct. The fact that a GM got a QB pick right once doesn't tell you anything more about their GMing ability than the fact that they got one wrong once. Hell - Bill Belichik landed the GOAT (I HATE saying that) in the 6th round. He's a garbage GM because his record over time makes clear that was a fluke. Ozzie Newsome picked Kyle Boller, Matt Elam, Breshad Perriman, and Travis Taylor in the first round of various drafts. Every GM misses on some picks; you analyze GMs by looking at their overall record (once you have a large enough sample size) and their process (until you do).

Douglas's sample size isn't large enough yet to draw conclusions, but his process is spot on and mostly made sense even for the players he missed on (that bad 2020 4th round aside).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Yes.

And that's also correct. The fact that a GM got a QB pick right once doesn't tell you anything more about their GMing ability than the fact that they got one wrong once. Hell - Bill Belichik landed the GOAT (I HATE saying that) in the 6th round. He's a garbage GM because his record over time makes clear that was a fluke. Ozzie Newsome picked Kyle Boller, Matt Elam, Breshad Perriman, and Travis Taylor in the first round of various drafts. Every GM misses on some picks; you analyze GMs by looking at their overall record (once you have a large enough sample size) and their process (until you do).

Douglas's sample size isn't large enough yet to draw conclusions, but his process is spot on and mostly made sense even for the players he missed on (that bad 2020 4th round aside).

His sample size is more than large enough for evaluation. 

And no the draft is not "random", and their process is irrelevant.  Results are all that matter.

If we ignore his personnel decisions, then we're left with outcomes.  Wins and losses.  On that metric, JD should have already been fired.  We are perhaps the least competitive team in the NFL over JD's time here since he was hired.

Again, these lines of thinking seem to be headed to one outcome:  "Give JD all the time he wants, don't judge him, because we can't, wins will come some day, one day, eventually.  Trust us."

I like JD's moves for the most part, but even I find this kind of reasoning/defense to be spurious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Warfish said:

His sample size is more than large enough for evaluation. 

And no the draft is not "random", and their process is irrelevant.  Results are all that matter.

If we ignore his personnel decisions, then we're left with outcomes.  Wins and losses.  On that metric, JD should have already been fired.  We are perhaps the least competitive team in the NFL over JD's time here since he was hired.

Again, these lines of thinking seem to be headed to one outcome:  "Give JD all the time he wants, don't judge him, because we can't, wins will come some day, one day, eventually.  Trust us."

I like JD's moves for the most part, but even I find this kind of reasoning/defense to be spurious.

"The draft" isn't random. But that's because of the law of large numbers. The outcome of individual picks, on the other hand, is significantly more random, because some percentage of picks are going to bust even for the best talent evaluators, some percentage are going to suffer catastrophic and unpredictable injury, some percentage are going to succeed beyond anyone's wildest predictions, etc. 

In terms of his sample size, he's made 26 draft picks over three years, which is more than enough to evaluate, in the abstract - except they've been in the league too short a time to get a result from. It's fair to draw conclusions about his 2020 class (a disaster, with only 4 picks on the active roster and two of those not really contributing), but it's way too early to draw firm conclusions on 2021 or (of course) 2022. Throw in the fact that 2020 was both his first ever draft and for one of the worst staffs in league history, and I'm nowhere near comfortable saying who he is as an evaluator of college talent. If 2021 continues to be a home run (and even if we missed on Zach, a 10 year starter at OG, WR1, RB1a, slot CB, playable LB and good depth corner is a very very good class) and 2022 is as good as we all hope (even if one of the #1s busts out completely that's 2 elite talents, + the best RB in the draft, + a good TE + a good rotational pass rusher) you'd have to call him very good at drafting despite the 2020 disaster. If a bunch of the 2021 class goes on the Becton/Mims trajectory and follows a promising rookie season with a bunch of nothing, you reach a different conclusion.

Anyway, "give him forever"? No. But when I have a guy with a good process (unlike Mac), a background in talent evaluation (unlike Idzik),  the ability to routinely make good trades, and solid cap management, I've got no problem giving him enough time to judge three full classes of draft picks. So that's another 2 years. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

So that's another 2 years. 

I rarely think you make silly arguments, but I think you're making a very silly argument here.  One I have no interest in back and forthing tbqh.

And the funny is your outcome....is exactly what I've already said elsewhere. 

He likely gets to the end of 2023 before he get canned, if he doesn't produce wins.

So we agree, even if we get there via very different routes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, clayton163v said:

I wrote this in another thread and decided it deserved its own.

OK, here it is.  NFL general managing is like playing "Go Fish" with playing cards.  It really is a good analogy.

Your turn arrives.  You have to wisely determine what you want and decide which is the priority since you only get one turn.  If you succeed, you get to go  again.  If you fail - in the NFL you have to find what you want in the draft of free agency.  Both of which are highly random events.  The NFL GM gets a turn every day.  He picks during the draft and free agency.  He is given the same resources each year as the other GMs, just like "Go Fish".

An NFL GM must use each turn wisely.  In "Go Fish" you do not pick a card - that happens when you fail - you ask your opponents if they have what you want.  You must guess what they have and whether you - or they - value it.  While this is more art than science, a simple empirical measurement of RESULTS can see how your GM plays "Go Fish".   Which is to say,  improving the quality of your incoming cards and getting more of them is how the game is played.  You do not win at "Go Fish" by getting lucky draws from the deck.   You win by making requests of the other GMs and making accurate assessments about your opponents resources.   Just like "Go Fish".

Picking cards - the draft and free agency - are random events.  We may hate to admit it.  But they are. 

Blaming the GM for a failure to obtain positive results from the random event is illogical.  That is the trough of justice.  Blaming the GM for poor use of his daily turn is fair game.  That is his job.   To win, you must do better than random chance.

Is there a single person on this entire board who will say that Douglas has played "Go Fish" poorly?  He is the best GM in the NFL.  And sooner or later the odds will prevail and that means wins.   Joe keeps obtaining extra picks and improving the quality of the  ones we have.  And he has done it while digging out of the worst salary cap hole in the entire league.   Unlike the other teams in salary cap hell like the perennial contending Saints - we had nothing to show for all that cash.   Neither good young players nor recent winning seasons. 

Many Jet fans complain: "yeah, yeah, yeah (someone will post this - lol), so we won the draft again.  Wake me when we win the division." 

I argue that we never won the draft.  Again and again we deluded ourselves into believing that we won the draft.  To "WIN" the draft, the GM must win the 365 turns leading up to the day the cards get picked and to win in free agency the same rule applies.  That never happened.  You're imagining it.  But it has been happening since we hired Joe Douglas.  

He has been putting on a command performance and we are better than we were.   The odds fellas.  The odds.  Joe keeps playing them.  Sooner or later we will hit BINGO with the random events. 

I disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jet9 said:

Joe is getting the Chuck Norris treatment and it's absurd. 

Our GM is being judged for the many great players he had to cut. Thats insane.  These same fans call the draft a crap shoot.  It’s mind boggling.  

Wins and losses don’t matter… just cut great players. Have players you cut suck somewhere else (Jamal) and you are a great GM.  

The draft is the most important function of a GM and while there is a lot of unknown it is far from a crap shoot. 

A monkey throwing darts could have done better than JD in 2020. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

"The draft" isn't random. 

. Throw in the fact that 2020 was both his first ever draft and for one of the worst staffs in league history, and I'm nowhere near comfortable saying who he is as an evaluator of college talent. 

Anyway, "give him forever"? No. But when I have a guy with a good process (unlike Mac), a background in talent evaluation (unlike Idzik),  the ability to routinely make good trades, and solid cap management, I've got no problem giving him enough time to judge three full classes of draft picks. So that's another 2 years. 

I edited your post…..   I’m in agreement.   Well done BTW.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, clayton163v said:

I wrote this in another thread and decided it deserved its own.

OK, here it is.  NFL general managing is like playing "Go Fish" with playing cards.  It really is a good analogy.

Your turn arrives.  You have to wisely determine what you want and decide which is the priority since you only get one turn.  If you succeed, you get to go  again.  If you fail - in the NFL you have to find what you want in the draft of free agency.  Both of which are highly random events.  The NFL GM gets a turn every day.  He picks during the draft and free agency.  He is given the same resources each year as the other GMs, just like "Go Fish".

An NFL GM must use each turn wisely.  In "Go Fish" you do not pick a card - that happens when you fail - you ask your opponents if they have what you want.  You must guess what they have and whether you - or they - value it.  While this is more art than science, a simple empirical measurement of RESULTS can see how your GM plays "Go Fish".   Which is to say,  improving the quality of your incoming cards and getting more of them is how the game is played.  You do not win at "Go Fish" by getting lucky draws from the deck.   You win by making requests of the other GMs and making accurate assessments about your opponents resources.   Just like "Go Fish".

Picking cards - the draft and free agency - are random events.  We may hate to admit it.  But they are. 

Blaming the GM for a failure to obtain positive results from the random event is illogical.  That is the trough of justice.  Blaming the GM for poor use of his daily turn is fair game.  That is his job.   To win, you must do better than random chance.

Is there a single person on this entire board who will say that Douglas has played "Go Fish" poorly?  He is the best GM in the NFL.  And sooner or later the odds will prevail and that means wins.   Joe keeps obtaining extra picks and improving the quality of the  ones we have.  And he has done it while digging out of the worst salary cap hole in the entire league.   Unlike the other teams in salary cap hell like the perennial contending Saints - we had nothing to show for all that cash.   Neither good young players nor recent winning seasons. 

Many Jet fans complain: "yeah, yeah, yeah (someone will post this - lol), so we won the draft again.  Wake me when we win the division." 

I argue that we never won the draft.  Again and again we deluded ourselves into believing that we won the draft.  To "WIN" the draft, the GM must win the 365 turns leading up to the day the cards get picked and to win in free agency the same rule applies.  That never happened.  You're imagining it.  But it has been happening since we hired Joe Douglas.  

He has been putting on a command performance and we are better than we were.   The odds fellas.  The odds.  Joe keeps playing them.  Sooner or later we will hit BINGO with the random events. 

Comparing the draft/FA to a card game that had zero skill involved  apart from not being blind is absurd.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Warfish said:

I rarely think you make silly arguments, but I think you're making a very silly argument here.  One I have no interest in back and forthing tbqh.

And the funny is your outcome....is exactly what I've already said elsewhere. 

He likely gets to the end of 2023 before he get canned, if he doesn't produce wins.

So we agree, even if we get there via very different routes.

If most of the post-2020 players are good/solid starters, and it still doesn't result in wins, it's pretty doubtful he'll get canned at the end of next year.

Otherwise the expectation is to go 1-for-1 on not only the HC or the drafted QB, but the parlay bet of the HC + QB both together.

And then after that, expect the next GM to go 1-for-1 with his own picked HC + QB, with similar expectations in the first 2 years.

What you'll end up with is less & less likelihood that leveler-headed GMs will want to use the Jets as the first big opportunity. You'll get the leftover candidates: the ones who couldn't get jobs in more attractive spots. It's a real thing.

Any of these decisions has to be weighed in with the why, not a stubborn "I don't care what happened; I expect wins," that even waves off as insignificant things that are anything but, like the majority of the starters being on IR, which happened just last year. Or, are they just losing a bunch of close games because of some questionable coaching vs. getting the snot beat out of them most weeks. 

If the team's players quite obviously suck - picking overhyped prospects and lazy FAs - and that's the reason for losses, then yes he deserves his pink slip. And it depends how bad, too. 2-4 wins every year isn't the same as 7-8 wins, even though neither are statistical winners. 

But it depends on the reason, before switching to a different GM + HC comes in who wants to remake the team in their preferred images, even if the roster is largely solid, like they did under Bradway/Edwards. Because it's hard enough getting a competent duo hired outright, without further stipulating they have to be adherents to the style of players the team's been building around for the past few years. It could be just a coaching change or just a QB change is needed (or - hopefully not - both); but we wouldn't be the first team where that worked, where the rest of the team was solid enough under different leadership on the sideline or in the huddle.

So many reasons can come into play between week 1 of 2022 and week 17 of 2023, that I couldn't make such a call in advance. And it's not like I'm one to shy away from calling for a GM's ouster either. Far from it.

  • Upvote 2
  • Sympathy 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, slats said:

I’m glad you’re not in charge.

You're entitled to that view.  Personally, I don't think I'd have done worse as GM than we've done the last 10 years.

40 minutes ago, slats said:

The Jets are in the midst of an 11 year playoff drought. Joe Douglas had his first draft when the team was up to just nine years straight missing the playoffs, lol. The team he took over was a very bad team with a number of bad players on bad contracts. I understand the frustration, but pinning it on the GM who just had his third draft or coach and QB who just completed their first season is misguided, to say the least. They’re right when they say they’re doing it differently than we’ve seen around here before. Mac, Idzik, and Tanny all went for big splashes and a feel good first year (executive of the year, anyone?). Joe Douglas’ first negotiation set the tone for his tenure here when he bought himself six years guaranteed to fix this sunken train wreck of an exploded space shuttle in a steady, deliberate manner.

I don't understand the point you're trying to make here.

I'm not "pinning" 40 years of anything on JD and Saleh.  I'm evaluating the on-field product they have produced.

And as noted, I (if I were in charge) would be givign JD till the end of 2023 (unless 2022 was a total poopshow) to show me what he's built.

Respectfully, no one gets forever to show improvement in the NFL.  If, by the end of 2022, we're another 3-4 win team, JD would have produced a 2, 4 and 3-4 wins seasons as GM.  Most GM's would be fired for that.  It has nothing to do with our long term frustrations.

Some of you seem to have a huge boner for the idea of "good process" when frankly you have no idea what JD's actual process is, you only see the results of it on draft day and in FA.  I tend to think JD is making mostly good decisions, but if Wilson fails, and/or Saleh fails, JD will most likely go down with them.  That's just how the NFL works.  It has nothing to do with me.

40 minutes ago, slats said:

 We can bitch and moan about the 2020 draft (I know, because I’ve seen it!), but how many teams besides the Bengals picking #1 that year had a good draft? Bitch about Becton over Wirfs (I didn’t prefer it, either) but it’s almost impossible to fault taking the OT there. Look at the players taken in the third and fourth rounds that year, and most of the guys JD absolutely should’ve taken instead of Captain Morgan are also on new teams or out of the league by now.

You're entitled to your opinions, I see no need to argue over them here.

40 minutes ago, slats said:

The process is very good.

You have no idea what "the process" is.  Only the outcome of that process and the results of that outcome.

40 minutes ago, slats said:

If he missed on the QB or the coach, that will suck, but I’d still give him another chance at both based on his last two drafts, free agency navigation, and obviously his trading capabilities.

You're entitled to that view.  I myself would likely not.  Ultimately, most NFL owners do not give their GM's multiple chances to draft #2 overall QB's or hire Head Coaches without showing some meaningful improvement in record in their time.

40 minutes ago, slats said:

This is probably the best front office executive this team has had in the building since they let Ron Wolf get away. 

Perhaps so.  They still need to start showing wins.  "Process" without results is irrelevant.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

If most of the post-2020 players are good/solid starters, and it still doesn't result in wins, it's pretty doubtful he'll get canned at the end of next year.

Lets hope we don't have to find out.

I'll repeat "good moves and great process" that doesn't actually results in wins is irrelevant.  Results are what counts, not feeling good about the process.

51 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

So many reasons can come into play between week 1 of 2022 and week 17 of 2023, that I couldn't make such a call in advance. And it's not like I'm one to shy away from calling for a GM's ouster either. Far from it.

So in this thread we've now heard that player personnel decisions are effective random, so we can't judge them, and winning is effectively random, so we can't judge on that.  Conveniently that only leaves so-called "process", which fans are in absolutely no position to judge because they have no insight into actual process.  Funny.

Enjoy the cool aid boys.  Like it or not, JD will not get to lose 13-14 games a year forever.  That is the entirely of my viewpoint.  Failure to win WILL result in his dismissal eventually.  And the lack of demand of our fans to start seeing some results is, IMO, frankly embarrassing.  Like drowning men clinging to a life preserver, you're all horny for "process" because in your hearts, you don't think we're going to win much more this year (or next it now sounds like).

I've liked most of JD's decision to-date myself.  But I like winning more.  To each their own.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Lets hope we don't have to find out.

I'll repeat "good moves and great process" that doesn't actually results in wins is irrelevant.  Results are what counts, not feeling good about the process.

So in this thread we've now heard that player personnel decisions are effective random, so we can't judge them, and winning is effectively random, so we can't judge on that.  Conveniently that only leaves so-called "process", which fans are in absolutely no position to judge because they have no insight into actual process.  Funny.

Enjoy the cool aid boys.  Like it or not, JD will not get to lose 13-14 games a year forever.  That is the entirely of my viewpoint.  Failure to win WILL result in his dismissal eventually.  And the lack of demand of our fans to start seeing some results is, IMO, frankly embarrassing.  Like drowning men clinging to a life preserver, you're all horny for "process" because in your hearts, you don't think we're going to win much more this year (or next it now sounds like).

I've liked most of JD's decision to-date myself.  But I like winning more.  To each their own.

Meh, his job is to get good players in & find the appropriate coach to oversee managing them.

In particular with the most key positions - namely, HC and QB - there has to be a bit more decorum unless the QB behind the scenes looks like Hackenberg to the point where seeing them in live action would solely serve to show the fans what the rest of the team already knows. 

By decorum I mean it's convenient for fans to think of moving players & coaches around like a Madden or fantasy football roster, without considering the politics of the moves. Owners who fire the GM too quickly, or GMs who fire the HCs too quickly, or HCs who give up on a talented player too quickly -- and for the fans, they demand that all those judgments run on the identical timeline, even if it's not realistic. 

But big duh, we all hope these are the right people in place, or on the field, and that the wins come sooner rather than later. 

Anyway I don't think it's the best means of action to discard the why for a failure, because cleaning house is likely to result in a reset of the timeline (start another 2+ year rebuild) and at least as likely to hire a downgrade, particularly at GM. The job has to be attractive enough for the next guy unless you want change just for the sake of change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Meh, his job is to get good players in & find the appropriate coach to oversee managing them.

Good players and an appropriate coach win games.  There is no reality where a team full of good players led by a good coach still loses tons of games every year for years after years.

So again, fan belief in so-called "good moves and great process" that doesn't actually results in wins is irrelevant. 

Results are what counts, not feeling good about the process.  Feeling good about process is a placebo at best.

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

IBy decorum I mean it's convenient for fans to think of moving players & coaches around like a Madden or fantasy football roster, without considering the politics of the moves. Owners who fire the GM too quickly, or GMs who fire the HCs too quickly, or HCs who give up on a talented player too quickly -- and for the fans, they demand that all those judgments run on the identical timeline, even if it's not realistic.

Define "too quickly". 

Me, I'd want to see metrics and data, what is the average NFL GM tenure, what is the average NFL GM tenure before they have a winning season or are fired, how many 1st round QB's does the average NFL GM get to draft, how many Head Coaches does the average NFL GM get to hire, etc, etc, etc.

Lets also keep in mind that "give up too quickly" is just another part of the sunk cost fallacy.  Ok, so GM X lost his first three years, but if we only wait he'll turn it around".  Maybe, but most likely not.  

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But big duh, we all hope these are the right people in place, or on the field, and that the wins come sooner rather than later. 

Agreed, of course.  As you say, the "Big duh".

But while we all want the same outcome, we do not all evaluate the pieces the same.  

Just look at Zach Wilson for example of that.  Some think he is elite and only a matter of time, just like they thought about Sam.

Me, I think the sooner we move on, the better for the ultimate goal of winning.

12 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Anyway I don't think it's the best means of action to discard the why for a failure, because cleaning house is likely to result in a reset of the timeline (start another 2+ year rebuild) and at least as likely to hire a downgrade, particularly at GM. The job has to be attractive enough for the next guy unless you want change just for the sake of change. 

Every failure has a novel-length list of reasons for why they failed.  

And NFL GM is rare enough, and well paid enough, that the "we won't find anyone to take this job" is pure fantasy.  An excuse to keep who you have.  We heard the same argument for Macc and previous GM's too, I will remind you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...