Dave Gettleman?

[thefuzz]

Do you really want me to copy and paste the list of every OT drafted after the Panthers picked for the last 2 years?

 

If you are going to tear the man down, at least back it up.

 

 

Also, you can't just do this for things that didn't go the way you wanted, you have to also do it for the things that went the right way, that you didn't see.

 

 

 

I think that you will see that he has very rarely screwed the pooch since being here, but you will have to do the research.

[TheRed]

Oh Steve Smith had a great game against us yesterday so that negates the fact that Gettleman has spent the last 30 years building winning franchises.

 

Not to split hairs here, but this is his first GM job, yes? I think there's just a tiny bit of a difference between being a scout, and a GM.

[Captroop]

If you are going to tear the man down, at least back it up.

 

 

Also, you can't just do this for things that didn't go the way you wanted, you have to also do it for the things that went the right way, that you didn't see.

 

 

 

I think that you will see that he has very rarely screwed the pooch since being here, but you will have to do the research.

 

Speaking of doing research, I'd never draft a guy in the forth round based on game tape that looks like this:

 

 

 

I'm not gonna knock the man across the board, but he's made huge missteps thus far, and don't even try to deny it. Do I think he can right the ship with a couple more years? Yes. Do I think he is capable of building a stronger team in the future? Yes. Do I think he has done some colossally stupid shiz thus far? Categorically, yes.

 

For example, and partially in response to Frash's post, a great GM isn't caught with his pants down when his franchise LT leaves. He's got a backup groomed and waiting in the wings. The fact that we are starting Byron Bell and a former DT as our tackles speaks volumes, especially when the OL has been a position of need for several concurrent years now. You can't say he was caught off guard. A great GM never is. (although I agree about Hardy. No one really saw that one coming).

[frash.exe]

Not to split hairs here, but this is his first GM job, yes? I think there's just a tiny bit of a difference between being a scout, and a GM.

1. That clarification is irrelevant since Gettleman had more experience in this league than most other people

2. Name me an active GM that is on their second GM tenure at least

[Proudiddy]

Is he also the reason Greg hardy got in an altercation? Is he the reason out top 4 backs are hurt? Is he the reason Thomas Davis is also out? Is he the reason cam messed up his ribs? We're still rebuilding. You guys expect him to build a championship team in a year. That's ridiculous. Every team has ups and downs. But ultimately we're still rebuilding.

 

That same "patience" mindset and acting as though everything is three years away is the reason we have have never had two consecutive winning seasons. 

 

That's a cop out and I can't stand it.

 

Why would we not expect to contend for a championship this year after being in the playoffs (and realistically, had the NFL not sent their company men to steal the game from us, we should've been in the NFCCG) last season?  LOL.  Sorry, I don't expect or hope to regress after a good year, nor do I find it acceptable.

 

Furthermore, all of the examples you mentioned are not valid.  Gettleman had nothing to do with Hardy did off the field...  Did Gettleman and Co. acquiesce to NFL pressure because JR is a company man and Goodell had to cover his own ass and take it out on us with Hardy?  Absolutely.  Now, that was most likely JR-influenced, but still, he had a choice.  Did Gettleman tie 13 mil up in Hardy and hamstring us elsewhere so he couldn't get a professional-grade offensive line unit?  Absolutely.  Did Gettleman trade away our best incumbent receiver and the best player in franchise history to another team that just torched our ass for the second week in a row?  Absolutely.  Did Gettleman allow another tone-setting player from our defense to walk virtually without a (valid) offer in Mike Mitchell, who was also contributing to an opponent blowing our asses out the week before?  Absolutely. 

 

See...  We can play this game forever.  The issue with our franchise from day one has been that Southern-charm, antebellum-tea-drinking, incestuous sense of the familiar and continuity.  It's the idea that, "it's okay, it's just one loss...  it's not the end of the world..."  "Hey guys, Rome wasn't built in a year."  "Give it time, be patient."  "Quit badmouthing our franchise, they're doing the best they can."  we hear it every year, and what do we get?  The same mediocre results over a multi-year span.  I'm sick of it.  Quit coddling them and making excuses.  The lack of accountability is what has allowed this "mediocre is okay, we're still getting checks" culture to flourish here.

[thefuzz]

Speaking of doing research, I'd never draft a guy in the forth round based on game tape that looks like this:

 

 

 

I'm not gonna knock the man across the board, but he's made huge missteps thus far, and don't even try to deny it. Do I think he can right the ship with a couple more years? Yes. Do I think he is capable of building a stronger team in the future? Yes. Do I think he has done some colossally stupid shiz thus far? Categorically, yes.

 

For example, and partially in response to Frash's post, a great GM isn't caught with his pants down when his franchise LT leaves. He's got a backup groomed and waiting in the wings. The fact that we are starting Byron Bell and a former DT as our tackles speaks volumes, especially when the OL has been a position of need for several concurrent years now. You can't say he was caught off guard. A great GM never is. (although I agree about Hardy. No one really saw that one coming).

 

Get specific man, serious.  I want to have this discussion with you, but you are refusing to do so.

 

 

As for the bolded part, I don't think that he has made 1 single big mistake, even at the OT position.  Please explain what you would have done different, where the cap money would come from, and how exactly that would affect the ability to sign Cam to a long term deal.

 

 

It's real damn easy to sit there and say "Bell fugging sucks, my sister can play OT better than him, OMGSSSSS" but in reality, what would you have done in DG's position?  That is much harder, and something that only a few posters on this board really do.

[Peppers90 NC]

In the draft alone:

• Just say no to Kugbila, especially in the fourth round
• Not doubled up on DT when we had much more pressing needs
• Not drafted an undersized DE in the second round
• Taken an OT at any point in the draft this year
• Taken an OT at any point in the draft last year
• Taken a WR in the draft last year

I don't even need hindsight for that. I said it at the time.

so you wouldnt have drafted Star or Short?  Which one?  And who instead?  I thought the Boston pick this year was bad and was wanting a T there and no one here that Kugs was a good pick last year.

[TheRed]

1. That clarification is irrelevant since Gettleman had more experience in this league than most other people

2. Name me an active GM that is on their second GM tenure at least

 

I'm not arguing with the fact that he has had years in this league, but were those years as a general manager?

 

Simply stating that there is a clear difference.

[TheRed]

Double.

[TheRumGone]

Get specific man, serious.  I want to have this discussion with you, but you are refusing to do so.

 

 

As for the bolded part, I don't think that he has made 1 single big mistake, even at the OT position.  Please explain what you would have done different, where the cap money would come from, and how exactly that would affect the ability to sign Cam to a long term deal.

 

 

It's real damn easy to sit there and say "Bell fugging sucks, my sister can play OT better than him, OMGSSSSS" but in reality, what would you have done in DG's position?  That is much harder, and something that only a few posters on this board really do.

 

my thing is the tag.

 

even if greg was still on the field and this fiasco never happened would we still be better off?

 

we could have signed that tackle that went to tampa. we could have made other signings for the line as well. I honestly don't know which would have worked out better for the team. But the tag changed everything.

[thefuzz]

my thing is the tag.

 

even if greg was still on the field and this fiasco never happened would we still be better off?

 

we could have signed that tackle that went to tampa. we could have made other signings for the line as well. I honestly don't know which would have worked out better for the team. But the tag changed everything.

 

Name names, and post contract numbers.  I'm not going to disagree with you, but we need to sort it all out exactly the way they happened.

 

 

P.S. you think we don't need Hardy now?

[TheRumGone]

I'm not arguing with the fact that he has had years in this league, but were those years as a general manager?

 

Simply stating that there is a clear difference.

 

you're missing what he is saying.

 

what gm has had a second go around....meaning experience as a gm before he became a gm. i can't think of 1. maybe there are a couple.

 

having that much experience in different facets of organization is incredible wisdom. He has seen whats worked and what hasn't worked.

 

[frash.exe]

I'm not arguing with the fact that he has had years in this league, but were those years as a general manager?

Simply stating that there is a clear difference.

Well completely ignoring the fact that he's spent a huge chunk of his career as a pro personnel director notwithstanding, are you suggesting that to be a good GM you need to have been one on at least another team before?

[TheRed]

you're missing what he is saying.

 

what gm has had a second go around....meaning experience as a gm before he became a gm. i can't think of 1. maybe there are a couple.

 

having that much experience in different facets of organization is incredible wisdom. He has seen whats worked and what hasn't worked.

 

 

Well completely ignoring the fact that he's spent a huge chunk of his career as a pro personnel director notwithstanding, are you suggesting that to be a good GM you need to have been one on at least another team before?

 

Who said he had to be a GM before?

 

I simply replied to you touting his 30 years, and added clarification to it.

 

In the end it's a whole different ball game having to manage an entire roster versus just scouting talent. Not to mention managing athletes on a personal level. Which goes back to the way the Steve Smith fiasco unfolded. He learned a little bit of a lesson there pretty quickly.