3rdand12 Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 Every great chef needs prep time. I have faith,as always, that THIS time we get it right Im hungry damnit We're ALL HunGry !! LEts Eat !! Go Bills A contract that no doubt contains certain clauses about personnel control. That is just who Andy Reid is. without question. Some would suggest... rightly so...
GunnerBill Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 without question. Some would suggest... rightly so... He has had a lot of regular season success so it is hard to argue with. But he does need checks and balances. In Philadelphia the more control he got the worse the team got. Having a GM but giving Reid a strong final say is the way to go... if the Dorsey relationship was no longer effective a divorce was inevitable.
YoloinOhio Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) He has had a lot of regular season success so it is hard to argue with. But he does need checks and balances. In Philadelphia the more control he got the worse the team got. Having a GM but giving Reid a strong final say is the way to go... if the Dorsey relationship was no longer effective a divorce was inevitable.Veach is Reid's guy from back in Philly. Word is that it is his job to lose. I wonder if Veach knew this was coming since the draft. I have a feeling that's why he never interviewed with the Bills. Edited June 25, 2017 by YoloinOhio
3rdand12 Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 Veach is Reid's guy from back in Philly. Word is that it is his job to lose. I wonder if Veach knew this was coming since the draft. I have a feeling that's why he never interviewed with the Bills. I was wondering about that matter. He may have been a name in lights for minute. Bills could have wanted Beane all along too
YoloinOhio Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 (edited) @terezpaylor Sources: Communication, management style were factors in Chiefs firing of GM John Dorsey: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article158155634.html Edited June 25, 2017 by YoloinOhio
HappyDays Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 It's a real copycat league. Scot McCloughan gets fired right before the draft, which paves the for Whaley to get fired right after, which paves the way for Dorsey to get fired soon after that. Before this year GMs weren't ever fired after February. It was always a "mutual parting of ways" if it happened at a weird time.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 @terezpaylor Sources: Communication, management style were factors in Chiefs firing of GM John Dorsey: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/article158155634.html ....TRANSLATION: Andy did it......cut to the chase.....
26CornerBlitz Posted June 26, 2017 Author Posted June 26, 2017 @RapSheet #Chiefs requested to interview Vikings assistant GM George Paton for their GM job, but for a variety of reasons he'll stay put, sources say.
YoloinOhio Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 I was wondering about that matter. He may have been a name in lights for minute. Bills could have wanted Beane all along too i think it's reasonable to assume that McD wanted Beane all along, but they decided to interview several others (some to hire for other roles which was smart) and Veach's name was mentioned early on as one they were going to reach out to. The fact he never interviewed there led me to think he was not interested. Especially with the shakeup that was taking place with KC's FO at that time that led to many changes even before the Dorsey firing, I think Veach was told that the job was his more sooner than later. With Beane, he was considered "GM in waiting" but Gettleman doesn't appear to be on his way out anytime soon so makes more sense to jump when given a good opportunity.
eball Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 It's a real copycat league. Scot McCloughan gets fired right before the draft, which paves the for Whaley to get fired right after, which paves the way for Dorsey to get fired soon after that. Before this year GMs weren't ever fired after February. It was always a "mutual parting of ways" if it happened at a weird time. Except it was established previously that the Whaley firing right after the draft was not unique. It may not be the norm, but it wasn't as rare as some were trying to argue.
Jasovon Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 I have a funny feeling KC could end up with the number 1 pick next year. I know it seems crazy but their offense is depleted and that defense will likely regress. Can you imagine if we got the number one pick from this trade?
Kirby Jackson Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 I have a funny feeling KC could end up with the number 1 pick next year. I know it seems crazy but their offense is depleted and that defense will likely regress. Can you imagine if we got the number one pick from this trade? I can't see it. I don't see them as a double digit win team again either. They are certainly primed for regression but they are still pretty good.
GunnerBill Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 I can't see it. I don't see them as a double digit win team again either. They are certainly primed for regression but they are still pretty good. Agree. Couple of injuries I can see them 6-10 but I can't see worse than that.
26CornerBlitz Posted June 26, 2017 Author Posted June 26, 2017 @RapSheet A new name: #Chiefs have requested permission to speak with #Titans Director of Player Personnel Ryan Cowden for their GM job, sources say @TomPelissero Two outside names on the radar for #Chiefs GM job, per sources: Scott Fitterer (#Seahawks) and Ryan Cowden (#Titans).
oldmanfan Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 Maybe I'm missing something, but is Andy Reid that great a HC or talent evaluator?
H2o Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 Maybe I'm missing something, but is Andy Reid that great a HC or talent evaluator? It didn't work out well for him in Philly when he had all of the power.
Kirby Jackson Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 Maybe I'm missing something, but is Andy Reid that great a HC or talent evaluator?I would say that he's a very good coach. I'm not sure that he's much of a talent evaluator. That place feels pretty dysfunctional.
HappyDays Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 Except it was established previously that the Whaley firing right after the draft was not unique. It may not be the norm, but it wasn't as rare as some were trying to argue. It was not established. Prior to Whaley not one GM was fired without the caveat of "mutual." This year there were 3 GMs fired outright. No mutual partings. @AdamSchefter: Over past 5 years, 21 GMs have been fired - none later than this year: Scot McCloughan, March 9 Doug Whaley, April 30 John Dorsey, June 22. All unusual situations.
3rdand12 Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 i think it's reasonable to assume that McD wanted Beane all along, but they decided to interview several others (some to hire for other roles which was smart) and Veach's name was mentioned early on as one they were going to reach out to. The fact he never interviewed there led me to think he was not interested. Especially with the shakeup that was taking place with KC's FO at that time that led to many changes even before the Dorsey firing, I think Veach was told that the job was his more sooner than later. With Beane, he was considered "GM in waiting" but Gettleman doesn't appear to be on his way out anytime soon so makes more sense to jump when given a good opportunity. No argument from me. Seems reasonable thinking Yolo. alos to note, some of these guys were lateral moves. so permission was given by other teams. I think this is a big deal honestly. We should revisit that point some day.
Saxum Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 It was not established. Prior to Whaley not one GM was fired without the caveat of "mutual." This year there were 3 GMs fired outright. No mutual partings. @AdamSchefter: Over past 5 years, 21 GMs have been fired - none later than this year: Scot McCloughan, March 9 Doug Whaley, April 30 John Dorsey, June 22. All unusual situations. Scot McCloughan's dismissal was not mutual agreement yet you state "Prior to Whaley". Why? Trying to emphasis Whaley was first does not make sense based on evidence you listed.
Recommended Posts