So how is the Panthers GM search going?

[panthers55]

32 minutes ago, GRWatcher said:

Anyone or any possible owners group willing to bid for the team and possibly become team owner(s) will not have gone into it blindly. They are not newborn babes nor are they the type to stand by themselves in an empty field unprepared and clueless. Be real. They will "be on the job" from the moment they place their bid if not before. They will have plans and will be fully aware of the work not only needed but also what has been done. There should be a list available for the new owner(s) because that is half of Hurney's job description. If a GM candidate is hired before we have new ownership, you adjust the list. Like this: easypeasy. Or you come in with an established GM search team because you know Hurney is not fulfilling his job. 

Has anyone considered that Richardson was going to sell the team in 2018 and didn't need any accusations or investigations to spur it?

Of course any new owner would have a GM search if they decided they needed a new one but who says we do. And if we decide that we want someone else you would be talking to Hurney who has already agreed to serve interim and find the next GM. My point is the timing of everything. No one knows who the owners will be and they will be focused on convincing the NFL of their suitability as the best group not who they would pick for a GM 6 months from now if they won the franchise. It take months to finalize a sale. And if you go in to the NFL committee and say we are going to clean house on a playoff team and get rid of a GM who has been voted one of the top sports executive in sports in 2008 and a coach with the best winning record in our history and 2 coach of the year awards. I doubt they would think you were that football savvy.

If you didnt think Hurney was the long term solution you move forward with a search for a new guy but unless you have previous owner experience you play for the long term and don't make rash decisions or act before you need to. We aren't Cleveland who are in panic mode. 

As a fan we worry about winning and losing while owners are business men who want a profit. A new GM would be low on my list. Boosting in-stadium revenue and marketing are likely higher priorities. Few if any business people I know come in with guns blazing unless there is a crisis and need for action. They come in, talk to everyone, and make moves carefully making sure you quell employees and players worries. You stress continuity and make changes, not huge ones until you know the lay of the land. If it ain't broke you don't need to throw it away and start over.

[Mr. Scot]

34 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

You love that comparison of Matt Millen but it holds no water. First of all Matt Millen was a great player but one of the worse GMs  in history with a winning record of 31-84. Compare that to Hurney's record the first time around of  90-102. How many Division crowns, playoff games and super bowls did Matt Millen 's lions play while he was GM?

Using your logic I guess New England shouldn't have hired Bill Belichick based on his performance as head coach for Cleveland.

Belichick showed enough to get a second chance.  Did anybody other than Jerry Richardson show interest in Hurney?

[Mr. Scot]

40 minutes ago, GRWatcher said:

Anyone or any possible owners group willing to bid for the team and possibly become team owner(s) will not have gone into it blindly. They are not newborn babes nor are they the type to stand by themselves in an empty field unprepared and clueless. Be real. They will "be on the job" from the moment they place their bid if not before. They will have plans and will be fully aware of the work not only needed but also what has been done. There should be a list available for the new owner(s) because that is half of Hurney's job description. If a GM candidate is hired before we have new ownership, you adjust the list. Like this: easypeasy. Or you come in with an established GM search team because you know Hurney is not fulfilling his job. 

Has anyone considered that Richardson was going to sell the team in 2018 and didn't need any accusations or investigations to spur it?

I've heard that theory before but I don't buy it.

As to new ownership, the common practice these days is to hire a consultant, which is what I'd expect anyone outside of DeBartolo to do.

[panthers55]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Belichick showed enough to get a second chance.  Did anybody other than Jerry Richardson show interest in Hurney?

Did he show interest in being a GM for anyone else after he left here? His whole career has been the Panthers and his other love is media which he did between stints. Maybe he came back because Richardson asked him and really doesn't want the job long term. Regardless of how many folks wanted him before if you look at this time around he has done a good job. That is more important than what he did years should. Just like now you would look at what Belichick did in New England not Cleveland. Likewise you would look at Hurney now not then

[CarolinaSamurai]

19 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Of course any new owner would have a GM search if they decided they needed a new one but who says we do. And if we decide that we want someone else you would be talking to Hurney who has already agreed to serve interim and find the next GM. My point is the timing of everything. No one knows who the owners will be and they will be focused on convincing the NFL of their suitability as the best group not who they would pick for a GM 6 months from now if they won the franchise. It take months to finalize a sale. And if you go in to the NFL committee and say we are going to clean house on a playoff team and get rid of a GM who has been voted one of the top sports executive in sports in 2008 and a coach with the best winning record in our history and 2 coach of the year awards. I doubt they would think you were that football savvy.

If you didnt think Hurney was the long term solution you move forward with a search for a new guy but unless you have previous owner experience you play for the long term and don't make rash decisions or act before you need to. We aren't Cleveland who are in panic mode. 

As a fan we worry about winning and losing while owners are business men who want a profit. A new GM would be low on my list. Boosting in-stadium revenue and marketing are likely higher priorities. Few if any business people I know come in with guns blazing unless there is a crisis and need for action. They come in, talk to everyone, and make moves carefully making sure you quell employees and players worries. You stress continuity and make changes, not huge ones until you know the lay of the land. If it ain't broke you don't need to throw it away and start over.

You know what is the number one revenue gain? Winning. If you think that's not the top of a new owners priorities your crazy. Ask the Patriots Winning makes you dough. Ask the Browns losing gets you jack. Ask the players, sponsers, anyone winning is the number one priority. If things need to change to make that happen it will. 

[JARROD]

14 hours ago, Cyberjag said:

The answer is on the roster.

That’s got to be up there with “it is what it is”

[panthers55]

5 minutes ago, CarolinaSamurai said:

You know what is the number one revenue gain? Winning. If you think that's not the top of a new owners priorities your crazy. Ask the Patriots Winning makes you dough. Ask the Browns losing gets you jack. Ask the players, sponsers, anyone winning is the number one priority

Not here like in other stadiums without PSLs. We have sellouts with 5 thousand empty seats each week. But they are all paid for. Most times winning means a full stadium which is the only place where owners don't have to share revenue. For example winning the division gives you one more game and I think the home team gets all the stadium ticket sales. I could be wrong about that. But otherwise the big push is filling suites and ticket sales which are critical for teams with season tickets but less so for us since we are compelled to buy them. And yes owners want to win because to be a billionaire you have to be competitive and used to winning. But you are crazy if you think they would care more about winning than money. Tampa is a classic team where the Glazers played cheap on their payroll in order to make more money. It bit them on the butt when they had repeated crappy teams and no PSLs to keep stadium revenue higher.

[CarolinaSamurai]

13 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Not here like in other stadiums without PSLs. We have sellouts with 5 thousand empty seats each week. But they are all paid for. Most times winning means a full stadium which is the only place where owners don't have to share revenue. For example winning the division gives you one more game and I think the home team gets all the stadium ticket sales. I could be wrong about that. But otherwise the big push is filling suites and ticket sales which are critical for teams with season tickets but less so for us since we are compelled to buy them. And yes owners want to win because to be a billionaire you have to be competitive and used to winning. But you are crazy if you think they would care more about winning than money. Tampa is a classic team where the Glazers played cheap on their payroll in order to make more money. It bit them on the butt when they had repeated crappy teams and no PSLs to keep stadium revenue higher.

Your thinking stadium and seat sales are the main revenue for a team that wins. It's not even close. Winning gets players more sponsers to do adds for, it gets your games in primetime spots with even more sweet ad revenue. Then you add in the ad revenue from companies wanting to support the winning team. Then let's factor in products that have the team logo on them. Jerseys, tea cozys, everything under the sun starts selling like gangbusters with winning teams. The bandwagon grows and new fans are made.

Some teams are still riding old success and are losing and make money ala Bears, Cowboys and the like. Once you win a SB that's for life and revenue goes up gangbusters just look at Seattle. Till they won they were nobodies now even though they look bad now they are still selling stuff and people are fans bc of past success. 

[Fox007]

90*-100* is now a good job.

People do have different standards for themselves I suppose.

*rounded

[panthers55]

2 minutes ago, CarolinaSamurai said:

Your thinking stadium and seat sales are the main revenue for a team that wins. It's not even close. Winning gets players more sponsers to do adds for, it gets your games in primetime spots with even more sweet ad revenue. Then you add in the ad revenue from companies wanting to support the winning team. Then let's factor in products that have the team logo on them. Jerseys, tea cozys, everything under the sun starts selling like gangbusters with winning teams. The bandwagon grows and new fans are made.

Some teams are still riding old success and are losing and make money ala Bears, Cowboys and the like. Once you win a SB that's for life and revenue goes up gangbusters just look at Seattle. Till they win they were nobodies now even though they look bad now they are still selling stuff and people are fans bc of past success. 

You are the one off base. Owners get nohing from player sponsorships and team sponsorships continue not on if the team wins but whether your sales go up through that sponsorship.  TV revenue is shared equally by all 32 teams regardless of how much they win and how many.prime time games they win. Merchandise is also shared equally except for Dallas who keep all their own and don't share with the other 31 teams. 

[CarolinaSamurai]

6 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

You are the one off base. Owners get nohing from player sponsorships and team sponsorships continue not on if the team wins but whether your sales go up through that sponsorship.  TV revenue is shared equally by all 32 teams regardless of how much they win and how many.prime time games they win. Merchandise is also shared equally except for Dallas who keep all their own and don't share with the other 31 teams. 

I know but the popularity drives things owners can make money from individually. Plus ticket sales are split 40/60 between teams playing. The only true way to gain revenue above the NFL is use of the stadium outside just football. All of that revenue is the teams alone. So winning equals more fans equals more money for all equals the ability to build a new stadium which equals more revenue. Or just upgrades to increase it's usefulness.  

[panthers55]

3 minutes ago, CarolinaSamurai said:

I know but the popularity drives things owners can make money from individually. Plus ticket sales are split 40/60 between teams playing. The only true way to gain revenue above the NFL is use of the stadium outside just football. All of that revenue is the teams alone. So winning equals more fans equals more money for all equals the ability to build a new stadium which equals more revenue. Or just upgrades to increase it's usefulness.  

You are right, one of the biggest potential revenue generators of income is events outside of football. Just like I said, ticket sales and marketing. Winning in football doesn't translate to whether the NCAA uses BOA for bowl games or musicians playing BOA. About the only thinking winning guarantees is higher ticket prices which allows owners to raise prices higher although they have done that after mediocre or even losing seasons. That is what people should be worried about with new owners. They have to recapture the cost of buying the team with much higher ticket prices and beer sales.

[frash.exe]

you guys remember when marty hurney signed mike tolbert to bolster our secondary? and then he signed haruki nakamura to bolster the defense’s ability to blow coverage assignments?

[Woodie]

6 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Of course any new owner would have a GM search if they decided they needed a new one but who says we do. And if we decide that we want someone else you would be talking to Hurney who has already agreed to serve interim and find the next GM. My point is the timing of everything. No one knows who the owners will be and they will be focused on convincing the NFL of their suitability as the best group not who they would pick for a GM 6 months from now if they won the franchise. It take months to finalize a sale. And if you go in to the NFL committee and say we are going to clean house on a playoff team and get rid of a GM who has been voted one of the top sports executive in sports in 2008 and a coach with the best winning record in our history and 2 coach of the year awards. I doubt they would think you were that football savvy.

If you didnt think Hurney was the long term solution you move forward with a search for a new guy but unless you have previous owner experience you play for the long term and don't make rash decisions or act before you need to. We aren't Cleveland who are in panic mode. 

As a fan we worry about winning and losing while owners are business men who want a profit. A new GM would be low on my list. Boosting in-stadium revenue and marketing are likely higher priorities. Few if any business people I know come in with guns blazing unless there is a crisis and need for action. They come in, talk to everyone, and make moves carefully making sure you quell employees and players worries. You stress continuity and make changes, not huge ones until you know the lay of the land. If it ain't broke you don't need to throw it away and start over.

I think a lot will be said by how quickly a sale takes place (not necessarily league approval, but an agreed upon sale).  If it happens fairly quickly after our season is over, then I think the foundation was already in place, which means that the new owner will likely have already been working on a transition plan, one that includes potential GM's.  However, if the sale of the team lingers over a couple of months, then whomever comes in will likely keep things status quo as they use the upcoming season to really get the transition moving along.

Assuming it happens quickly, I think the new owner will already have a team to work on getting the business side up and running, and will likely have the foundation for the football operations side in place as well (people that successful typically have all there ducks in a row before moving forward on any big venture like this).  They will also likely have hired a consultant to assist with the GM search.  And remember, the league also provides a list of the top GM candidates each year, so a new owner wouldn't be coming in blind or unprepared.  

My guess is that if our season ends in January, then the team will have an agreement for sale by the end of February, and the owners will vote on it at the league meetings in March.  Marty would likely stay until his contract is up in June, by which time a new GM would have been hired and transitioning into the role.  That will pretty much guarantee that Rivera will be back next year since the timing doesn't work for hiring a new coach.