Last Year’s Draft

[Toomers]

18 minutes ago, carolinanimal said:

On GM's I judge them on draft performance and free agency. Once the season starts the GM really doesnt affect the game much. 

He cant call plays, choose who starts, call timeouts, choose which scheme they will run...etc. that is up to the coach.

 

And teams/GMs that draft well and do well in FA usually have a good W/L record. 

   And your criteria is all opinion-based. So you can basically excuse away losing seasons with “he drafted so and so”. Great. The rest of the team sux but we have a draft pick. 

  In your scenario, the GM doesn’t even matter. There is plenty to do after FA. Cuts, waivers, trades. Now we have went from “hindsight” to explain away any mistakes, to the GM should be judged by the performance of the team they set up. 

  What’s the next criteria? Height? 

[carolinanimal]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

How do you judge whether a draft pick or a signing was good or not except by watching whether they help the team win?

If you say "well I think this guy was a good draft pick" and "I think this guy was a good signing", but your team is losing, where they really that good?

You can't just absolve the GM from all blame, especially not when that GM works together with different coaches but the teams still keep losing.

A draft pick or picks could still be good and the team lose right? 

There are good players and good rookies on bad teams. 

I don't absolve the gm of blame. I just blame the coach a little bit more.

[Toomers]

2 minutes ago, carolinanimal said:

A draft pick or picks could still be good and the team lose right? 

There are good players and good rookies on bad teams. 

I don't absolve the gm of blame. I just blame the coach a little bit more.

  Then explain why the same coach is 51-28-1 with one GM, and 20-28 with the other. 

  So the success of the team has nothing to do with the evaluation of any GM. 

  We have reached Infinite Sadness.  

 Let’s just flip a coin on all important decision. 

[Toomers]

5 minutes ago, carolinanimal said:

A draft pick or picks could still be good and the team lose right? 

There are good players and good rookies on bad teams. 

I don't absolve the gm of blame. I just blame the coach a little bit more.

And A GM can pick Andrew Luck and still be horrendous. Or Joe Thomas.. Where do you think those GMs are now. 

 

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, carolinanimal said:

A draft pick or picks could still be good and the team lose right? 

There are good players and good rookies on bad teams. 

I don't absolve the gm of blame. I just blame the coach a little bit more.

Rivera went to the playoffs four out of five seasons with rosters set by Dave Gettleman.

He's had three (and a half, sort of) under Hurney. Together they've compiled a sub 500 record.

If you looked at that logically, where would you most likely see the problem?

(mind you, I think Rivera is a lousy coach, but the logic still applies)

 

[carolinanimal]

10 minutes ago, Toomers said:

And teams/GMs that draft well and do well in FA usually have a good W/L record. 

   And your criteria is all opinion-based. So you can basically excuse away losing seasons with “he drafted so and so”. Great. The rest of the team sux but we have a draft pick. 

  In your scenario, the GM doesn’t even matter. There is plenty to do after FA. Cuts, waivers, trades. Now we have went from “hindsight” to explain away any mistakes, to the GM should be judged by the performance of the team they set up. 

  What’s the next criteria? Height? 

There has to be nuance to any decision. it cant just be" Oh we lost, so everyone sucks"!! Good organizations look at all factors and evaluate from there. My "criteria" is did he do his job to the standard that was set by the owner. if that answer is yes by the owner, then we have to go along with, even if we think he sucks. 

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, carolinanimal said:

There has to be nuance to any decision. it cant just be" Oh we lost, so everyone sucks"!! Good organizations look at all factors and evaluate from there. My "criteria" is did he do his job to the standard that was set by the owner. if that answer is yes by the owner, then we have to go along with, even if we think he sucks. 

What if the owner is a moron?

[SOJA]

Eh Jackson is great, Ian Thomas looks like an absolute steal, this off-season is huge for dj he has to become a better route runner and create separation 

 

the rest of the picks I think are average to bad. Gaul being the prime suspect 

[Toomers]

1 minute ago, carolinanimal said:

There has to be nuance to any decision. it cant just be" Oh we lost, so everyone sucks"!! Good organizations look at all factors and evaluate from there. My "criteria" is did he do his job to the standard that was set by the owner. if that answer is yes by the owner, then we have to go along with, even if we think he sucks. 

  So what’s his job? What is the criteria if winning/losing are irrelevant. Unless the are in it for the money, they all want to win. But your theory is the owner said “it’s ok we lost 7 in a row, you drafted a couple guys”. All good. And how many years of losing do you put up with before you actually hold someone responsible for losing teams. 

   

[ForJimmy]

15 hours ago, Truck Stick said:

He drafted 2 players that are good

But what about putting together this dogshit roster that he is the GM of

Moore, Jackson, Thomas makes 3? 3 starters in a draft is pretty good. Gaulden and Carter might be starting as soon as next year... He had a good draft. Not the best at Free Agents, Cap Management, or Contracts, but this past draft is looking solid. 

[carolinanimal]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

What if the owner is a moron?

i guess we are screwed then man!!!

[Davidson Deac II]

I disliked bringing Hurney back as much as anyone, but the expectations irt him are a little unrealistic.  He has been back a year.  With contracts and salary caps, it takes at least 2-3 years before a GM really gets to call the roster his. 

 

I am still pissed about the Butker/Gano action though.

[Cpt slay a ho]

1 hour ago, Toomers said:

Show me where I brought up anything about DG until someone else introduced it. I tried to keep it completely about Hurney 2.0. And people still wouldn’t discuss it. 

  In 45 years of watching Steelers(and Panthers) games, I can easily say O be never considered having a favorite GM. And you go into every Hurney thread and bring up DG. I try to discuss Hurney but there’s an excuse for every mistake or just call it “hindsight” and act like everything is cool having the worst GM in the NFL. I would be fine never mentioning DGs name ever again. But when posters use him as an excuse for anything Hurney does wrong, or the FACT that he was hired to take DGs place and he’s still here. What on his resume, makes him qualified to be our GM. Or any teams GM? I want to talk about the 25% playoffs GM we have now. Let’s try that. One rule. No mention of DG by anyone. Anytime y’all want. You round up opinions. I’ll bring facts. As per usual. 

you brought dg up in another thread in which i said both gm's sucked, you proceeded to prove my point by trying to turn it into a dg vs hurney debate instead of providing anything to point to why dg didn't fail. I rarely mention dg unless the thread is specifically about him or a move he made or a player he chose. there's no excuses for hurney, but some of us would like to not live in the past and constantly bring up his failures in his first stint that have zero impact on his decisions the 2nd go around. lol what on his resume qualifies him, being a previous gm is warrant enough, with this attitude or mindset guys like pete carroll would have never been hired again due to failures in there first stint as a HC. no one is proclaiming hunrey as gm jesus or anything but taking any slight praise given to him as an excuse to bring up failures from almost a decade ago is tedious, lazy, and irrelevant 

[panthers55]

29 minutes ago, Toomers said:

  So what’s his job? What is the criteria if winning/losing are irrelevant. Unless the are in it for the money, they all want to win. But your theory is the owner said “it’s ok we lost 7 in a row, you drafted a couple guys”. All good. And how many years of losing do you put up with before you actually hold someone responsible for losing teams. 

   

Or Tepper looks at the fact we were 6-2 and rolling and Cam gets hurt and we lose 7 in a row, the majority by less than 7 points. You have Rivera call the plays and suddenly the defense gets better. You couple that with a practice squad quarterback in Norv's system dropping 30 plus points on a New Orleans defense that played it's starters for the first half. Then you realize that if Rivera leaves then Turner likely retires  meaning you are starting over in a season where 25% of the teams are overhauling their staffs. So you opt for continuity and have patience not because that is what you want to do simply that is the smart thing to do at this point and see what happens.  What you and others use to justify your dislike for Hurney is irrelevant to Tepper. That is your baggage not his. There is no compelling reason to can Hurney with the draft upcoming given how well Hurney did in 2018 which is all Tepper cares about.