Panthers interview requests

[Mr. Scot]

6 minutes ago, Mage said:

Saying "I can't help you" is 100% putting down someone who has a different opinion than you.

If you say so

You're free try and refute the argument, of course. By all means, tell me anything and everything positive you've read about Halaby that makes you think he's the right guy and this other stuff won't matter.

And specifics to Halaby himself, please. Association with the Eagles isn't good enough. Using that logic you could argue for Brian Johnson as our head coach.

Whadda ya got?

(and FYI, responding that I wouldn't listen anyway or that it's all just guesswork is basically an admission that you don't really have anything and you're just buying into the spin)

Edited January 16 by Mr. Scot

[Bear Hands]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I have no problem with people liking different candidates.

But yeah, if you can read everything that's been written with about Halaby to this point and still say "that's the kind of guy we need", I can't help you.

Jeffrey Lurie is at this point what David Tepper wishes he was, and not in a good way. Wanting to emulate that kind of environment is not something I can sign up for.

Call it guesswork if you want, but there's a lot less "guessing" involved when you actually take the time to research the candidates.

Bolding the unnecessary when Mage made some perfectly fine points.

You're extrapolating a lot from primarily one secondhand source via article and then turning it into some grand narrative.  The Athletic is awesome, but not gospel.  Tweets from NFL Insiders are not gospel. 

He's 100% right, we have no clue at the end of the day.  You're treating "researching" (aka googling work history and finding tweets & articles to repost) as the end all be all in analyzing a GM candidate. These are not payer evals.  The skills required and the skills they have to perform the role are not inherently observable to a fan of a team.  

Take things for what they are and accept knowns vs. unknowns.  

[Bear Hands]

I'm not trying to get in an argument about Halaby, but just relax man.  It's a GM search.  Like we have no say and it's impossible to really know the goings on.  Take a breath from the reposting all this stuff for a minute.  

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Bear Hands said:

Bolding the unnecessary when Mage made some perfectly fine points.

You're extrapolating a lot from primarily one secondhand source via article and then turning it into some grand narrative.  The Athletic is awesome, but not gospel.  Tweets from NFL Insiders are not gospel. 

He's 100% right, we have no clue at the end of the day.  You're treating "researching" (aka googling work history and finding tweets & articles to repost) as the end all be all in analyzing a GM candidate. These are not payer evals.  The skills required and the skills they have to perform the role are not inherently observable to a fan of a team.  

Take things for what they are and accept knowns vs. unknowns.  

What specifically were the "fine points"?

Would you suggest the reports that have come out are false or misleading? Based on what?

(that they're negative towards somebody you might like isn't a good enough reason)

And to be clear, when I say research I'm not just talking about work history. We've got a full story here about some pretty negative behavior, but listening to that is somehow "guesswork" and ignoring it is a positive?

Same offer: Give me something that's positive enough about Halaby to counteract the stories. I'm happy to listen.

[Bear Hands]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

What specifically were the "fine points"?

Would you suggest the reports that have come out are false or misleading? Based on what?

(that they're negative towards somebody you might like isn't a good enough reason)

And to be clear, when I say research I'm not just talking about work history. We've got a full story here about some pretty negative behavior, but listening to that is somehow "guesswork" and ignoring it is a positive?

Same offer: Give me something that's positive enough about Halaby to counteract the stories. I'm happy to listen.

I'm not speaking to Halaby.  If you don't see what's trying to be offered as a differing opinion about a freaking GM search, then just proceed with your shtick.  You're completely missing the point in this attempt to never look wrong.  Proceed with your 500 per day.  

Not interesting in continuing this so just keep doing you.  

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, Bear Hands said:

I'm not speaking to Halaby.  If you don't see what's trying to be offered as a differing opinion about a freaking GM search, then just proceed with your shtick.  You're completely missing the point in this attempt to never look wrong.  Proceed with your 500 per day.  

Well, that's mature of you

5 minutes ago, Bear Hands said:

I'm not trying to get in an argument about Halaby, but just relax man.  It's a GM search.  Like we have no say and it's impossible to really know the goings on.  Take a breath from the reposting all this stuff for a minute.  

So basically, let others post their opinions but don't post mine...

Yeah, sure

[Bear Hands]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Well, that's mature of you

So basically, let others post their opinions but don't post mine...

Yeah, sure

Yes--I'm saying to relax.  CTFO.  Mage offered a perfectly reasonable stance about not taking this face value and to not conflate 1 article and you're getting hyper-defensive and being a condescending prick.  Just stop.

[Mage]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

If you say so

You're free try and refute the argument, of course. By all means, tell me anything and everything positive you've read about Halaby that makes you think he's the right guy and this other stuff won't matter.

And specifics to Halaby himself, please. Association with the Eagles isn't good enough. Using that logic you could argue for Brian Johnson as our head coach.

Whadda ya got?

(and FYI, responding that I wouldn't listen anyway or that it's all just guesswork is basically an admission that you don't really have anything)

You're right.  I don't have anything.  If you want me to admit you are smarter than me on the subject, than I will.  Because you almost certainly are (and I mean that seriously - you have introduced me to candidates I have never heard of).

Just as my time as a fan in the NFL, I've seen "good" GM candidates.  I've seen "bad" GM candidates.  And they all seem to hit or bust more or less the same.  At least at head coach, you can (for the most part) see how involved a coach is as a coordinator or positions coach.  If a front office guy isn't a GM, how can you really evaluate him?  Sure, the article sounds bad, but it is also just that.  An article.  I'm not debunking it, I'm not saying it isn't true (it more than likely is), but it might not also tell the full story.  And how can we verify it?  

But that's just my stance.  I admit I don't have anything beyond that, because I'm outside the buildings and I don't think anyone outside the building can really know what is going on inside the building or how good a worker is (obviously this is different with someone who is actually a GM, because you can evaluate him on variables that you can see ie free agent signings, trade quality, drafts, etc).  That doesn't mean we can't speculate, I just feel like it is hard to take a hardline stance against a guy.  Maybe that is just me playing it cautious.  But it feels impossible to know outside of extreme candidate cases.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Bear Hands said:

Yes--I'm saying to relax.  CTFO.  Mage offered a perfectly reasonable stance about not taking this face value and to not conflate 1 article and you're getting hyper-defensive and being a condescending prick.  Just stop.

Sure... except it's not.

I should add it's also not just one article. There's plenty of info out there about the dysfunction going on with the Eagles. But that's beside the point.

When a story is out there, and a pretty well sourced and documented story at that, saying "well, we don't know" or "I'm not worried about it" isn't a rebuttal. It's a denial.

I could also point out that a personal attack like this isn't exactly moderation, but hey...

[Bear Hands]

What personal attack? I'm saying you're being one, not that you are one.  Not everyone is going to take away exactly what you did from that article.  It's okay.  

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, Mage said:

You're right.  I don't have anything.  If you want me to admit you are smarter than me on the subject, than I will.  Because you almost certainly are (and I mean that seriously - you have introduced me to candidates I have never heard of).

Just as my time as a fan in the NFL, I've seen "good" GM candidates.  I've seen "bad" GM candidates.  And they all seem to hit or bust more or less the same.  At least at head coach, you can (for the most part) see how involved a coach is as a coordinator or positions coach.  If a front office guy isn't a GM, how can you really evaluate him?  Sure, the article sounds bad, but it is also just that.  An article.  I'm not debunking it, I'm not saying it isn't true (it more than likely is), but it might not also tell the full story.  And how can we verify it?  

But that's just my stance.  I admit I don't have anything beyond that, because I'm outside the buildings and I don't think anyone outside the building can really know what is going on inside the building or how good a worker is (obviously this is different with someone who is actually a GM, because you can evaluate him on variables that you can see ie free agent signings, trade quality, drafts, etc).  That doesn't mean we can't speculate, I just feel like it is hard to take a hardline stance against a guy.  Maybe that is just me playing it cautious.  But it feels impossible to know outside of extreme candidate cases.

I have no idea whether I'm smarter than you. Nor would I claim to be such. And that's not the point of the discussion.

Yes, guys with great resumés fail while guys with mediocre resumés succeed. Lord knows I've seen players, coaches, and executives follow paths that I never would have predicted. That's why I don't claim to be Miss Cleo.

I will admit up front that I don't want any of the analytics guys because I just don't buy that sort of thing working. Unfortunately, that's likely the direction we're heading because...Tepper.

However, none of those other guys strike me with the kind of huge negatives that Halaby does. And no, it isn't just this story. The Eagles under Lurie and Roseman have a history of dysfunction that makes even David Tepper look like a professional.

That's my thing here. It's not about you. I definitely disagree with your argument but I'm not going to stand here and suggest that I'm always right or you're always wrong. My apologies if it comes off that way.

Edited January 16 by Mr. Scot

[Bear Hands]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

I have no idea whether I'm smarter than you. Nor would I claim to be such. And that's not the point of the discussion.

Yes, guys with great resumés fail while guys with mediocre resumés succeed. Lord knows I've seen players, coaches, and executives follow paths that I never would have predicted. That's why I don't claim to be Miss Cleo.

I will admit up front that I don't want any of the analytics guys because I just don't buy that sort of thing working. Unfortunately, that's likely the direction we're heading, but... Tepper.

However, none of those other guys strike me with the kind of huge negatives that Halaby does. And no, it isn't just this story. The Eagles under Lurie and Roseman have a history of dysfunction that makes even David Tepper look like a professional.

That's my thing here. It's not about you. I definitely disagree with your argument but I'm not going to stand here and suggest that I'm always right or you're always wrong. My apologies if it comes off that way.

thank you

[Martin]

25 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

If you say so

You're free try and refute the argument, of course. By all means, tell me anything and everything positive you've read about Halaby that makes you think he's the right guy and this other stuff won't matter.

And specifics to Halaby himself, please. Association with the Eagles isn't good enough. Using that logic you could argue for Brian Johnson as our head coach.

Whadda ya got?

(and FYI, responding that I wouldn't listen anyway or that it's all just guesswork is basically an admission that you don't really have anything and you're just buying into the spin)

The Eagles have built a very talented roster, but currently have really bad coaching after both coordinators left last year. Your “… Using that logic you could argue for Brian Johnson…” argument is really poor. I’m personally not a fan of the org as a whole, but wow you are way off with that logic.

[CRA]

38 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

You're free try and refute the argument, of course. 

I mean, ain't you the dude who thinks the only real reason Fitterer should of been fired was because he stabbed Frank in the back.....not the fact he was the worst GM in franchise history that made Marty Hurney look like the greatest football mind in the history of the sport? 

same dude who argued tooth and nail that Fitterer just had to be brought back once we fired Rhule and ended that nightmare era? 

but once again, it's everyone else that isn't making good points.