QB or not QB

I realize that I may be somewhat slow cognitively but…

Harris being “a part of the quarterback interview process” means that he is a part of the QB interview process. I doubt that he is keeping everyone’s coffee cups filled or sitting in the corner absorbing the experience.
 
Boone said:
100% agree. Get the fuck out of the room Josh. Seriously - what does he possibly have to offer those conversations/assessments that brings any real value. I don’t want Peters selecting g a QB with ANY influence from an owner. Period.
Click to expand...
Exactly, that's the issue. For those who want to excuse it, I think many of us have direct experience in multi-tiered organizations. When higher tiers interfere or butt in to lower tiers, even as "observers" - it changes things, and rarely for the better IF the person at the bottom is a sharp, hard-working type of person. It just generally changes how they treat the situation, and that isn't the dynamic you want when you hire "the best and brightest."

There are other issues at play too, this is not in isolation. The HC search is now fairly documented, and it was not ideal. It wasn't the worst ever, but it clearly had too many people involved which slows it down. That is for HC though - there is at least some understanding of that one maybe getting larger.

This is for QB. That is a lot of rungs beneath "owner" - Harris being involved simply isn't right. There isn't really an excuse here. He should meet whoever HIS PEOPLE decide on, and judge THEIR decision. Even his involvement changes the metrics. You can't hold people accountable for decisions when you don't empower them enough to FULLY make their own decisions. It's key to this being a success, and we are officially seeing that simple guideline being screwed up in multiple places. Recent reports are that Spielman is out of his consultant role, which is good. Myers is still "involved" (seemingly) which is a head-scratcher. I like the "idea" of Myers helping to establish solid culture and organizational fundamentals, but it has to be very carefully done. Once you have a GM, you have to empower him, and I see far too many ways that Myers can even unintentionally undermine Peters in this kind of structure.

Overall, this does not look good. Of course, we can hope and make up a lot of stories on how it may be fine - but the actual FACTS, the actual things we CAN see with good precision - they don't paint a good picture right now.
 
I will only quibble with one point- I don’t think that the timing of the HC hire was impacted by the comprehensive approach that the team undertook, it was the allowable interviewing schedule dictated by the league. I still don’t believe that Quinn was a clear favorite (though I’m also not disappointed by the end result) but that he was, at worst, one of their top 3 candidates. The delays in being able to conduct any final interviews will Johnson and Macdonald were beyond their control and they wasted no time in getting to them.
 
The people have spoken-



IMG_3048.jpeg
 
Meanwhile, let's get serious for a minute.

 
Good lord, guys.

Are we really this damaged and cynical?
 
SkinsNumberOne said:
- but the actual FACTS, the actual things we CAN see with good precision - they don't paint a good picture right now.
Click to expand...
What facts?

Other than knowing Harris is in Indianapolis and that he sat in on the interviews, We. Know. NOTHING.

Anything beyond that is our reading stuff into the situation and we are doing that based on OUR experience which, I think we can all agree, is less than ideal.

We have had 25 years of a guy who treated the team like he was part of a fantasy league. Before that, we had The Squire - a man beyond well-experienced in running an NFL club before most of us were old enough to pay attention to much past game day.

We have never watched a competent owner work up close and personally in the infancy of their ownership.
 
Last edited:
Neophyte said:
What facts?

Other than knowing Harris is in Indianapolis and that he sat in on the interviews, We. Know. NOTHING.

Anything beyond that is our reading stuff into the situation and we are doing that based on OUR experience which, I think we can all agree, is less than ideal.

We have had 25 years of a guy who treated the team like he was part of a fantasy league. Before that, we had The Squire - a man beyond well-experienced in running an NFL club before most of us were old enough to pay attention to much past game day.

We have never watched a competent owner work up close and personally in the infancy of their ownership.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this addresses any concern those of us concerned have :)

No one thinks Harris is Snyder. But the owner was specifically asked ‘what now?’ after the Dan Quinn was hired and he stated he would step back and let the football people he hired do what they were hired to do.

Sitting in on QB interviews is the exact opposite of that.

Does that mean he will sway thinking/decisions or that it will contribute to a bad one? No. But because you can sit in doesn’t mean you should.

It’s not a good thing. And it has nothing to do with our past (at least for me).
 
I disagree, Boone.

My boss routinely sits in on my meetings with partners, prospective partners, and other employees. She is sales-oriented, not particularly technical. She isn't influencing the meeting so much as trying to stay abreast of what our company does from a technical perspective and see how I do what I do.

I don't see this as any different.

Now, if we find out during OTAs that Harris is sitting in the QB room when Pritchard is working with Howell and whoever else we have on the roster, then it's a different matter. But right now, it's Peters running a meeting and his direct boss sitting in to learn something. It happens in the business world every day and no one thinks anything of it.
 
Neophyte said:
I disagree, Boone.

My boss routinely sits in on my meetings with partners, prospective partners, and other employees. She is sales-oriented, not particularly technical. She isn't influencing the meeting so much as trying to stay abreast of what our company does from a technical perspective and see how I do what I do.

I don't see this as any different.

Now, if we find out during OTAs that Harris is sitting in the QB room when Pritchard is working with Howell and whoever else we have on the roster, then it's a different matter. But right now, it's Peters running a meeting and his direct boss sitting in to learn something. It happens in the business world every day and no one thinks anything of it.
Click to expand...
We are all biased by our experiences! I think your experience sounds great, but there are other bosses out there who sit in and do have a lot of uninformed opinions. It sounds like Harris may be similar to your boss from these recent tweets SilentThreat has now posted, which is great!
I just didn't want to assume it, since I have certainly seen the other kind of boss; where their presence does in fact influence things negatively, and it's best when they let their direct hires do their jobs and trust the process (yes, I went there!).

At the end of the day, if a different owner hired a GM and then had 2 consultants, the GM, himself, and another person involved in HC interviews, I would say "that seems like a broken process" - I mean, less than ideal at least. If a different owner sits in on QB interviews, even as an observer, I would say "Hm, I would think it's better if he's not in the room at all." I am looking at this how I would look at any NFL team, even though I like Harris and the team and the overall direction has to be positive as every day is another day removed from the Snyder-hell (tm) we were in.

Anyway, I wasn't as aware of these other quotes, which definitely paint a better light. For my "ideal scenario" I would probably still lean towards less direct involvement and more blind trust (with accountability on actions/results). I was hoping for more in that direction, and so far I haven't seen that to the degree I had hoped. It definitely sounds as good as it can be, closer to your experiences, which is good news.
 
My concern is not him sitting in on it, it would be with what is yet to come.

If we find out Harris favored one guy over another and he made that known in the draft room..... then sitting in on the interview is a bit concerning as it has then become a trend.

if we hear nothing else about this, and continue to hear the coaching staff and front office rave about how they're all paddling in the same direction, even if ultimately the player selected doesn't work out... it all goes away.

Its like a kid sneaking a piece of candy and hiding it from their parents, we haven't reached a pattern of behavior that precludes someone growing up to be a career criminal... but if they do end up being a career criminal, the parents will think back to the little things they did early that were 'signs.'
 
A ‘big boss’ sitting in the room changes the temperature in the room. A ‘big boss’ being involved in the discussions that would clearly follow the interviews would undoubtedly have some impact, as well.

It may ultimately have no affect on the final decision but it also may. Time will tell. It is absolutely Harris’ right to attend. Is it smart? That should fairly be open for debate.
 
I know I haven't been around much to comment on this kind of thing lately ... but in this case, if I WAS around, I'd say this:

If I'm Josh Harris, given all the particular circumstances in play, I'm in the room for those interviews. And not worried about what anybody outside that room thinks.

*

Highly recommend the segment Al Galdi had on this today. Pretty much arrives at where I'm at, and takes the time to examine it--including from a couple angles I might not have thought of. He starts the segment at 10:35 riffing on the old TV show Wings to set the stage. The actual take starts at 13:10.

 
I think Galdi’s take, while reasonable, lacked nuance.

There is a wide area between ‘Harris is just sitting in to educate himself on the process’ and ‘Harris is meddling like Snyder did’. It’s not either/or.

I would not describe myself as even ‘concerned’ - that would be overstating it. But here is what I think I know:

1) Picking the right QB is very, very difficult even for the experts.
2) Let’s say that we are having an internal debate between 2 guys (I think this is a very likely scenario) and it is a very close decision…
3) Does anyone really believe that Josh Harris has refrained from saying one word about these QB prospects as each exited their interview or after the process was completed?
4) A brand new GM has a lot to consider. One thing it is impossible not to consider is ‘what does my owner want and how do I make him happy?’
5) If we reach a point in draft crunch time where we have to make the call between 2 young QBs, does anyone want what Josh Harris thinks to be a factor in that crucial decision?

Since he attended these meetings and almost certainly has conveyed some sense of what he heard and saw, it is a risk.

I also think this was an opportunity to demonstrate that he trusts the staff he hired. He said he would step back and this doesn’t reflect that. Maybe it will have zero impact. But it was easy enough to avoid having influence, he just opted to do what he wanted instead.
 
I hear ya, brother. I'll just refer to my previous post. :)
 
I'm looking at Harris' past history. If he was a heavy handed owner or a meddler, we'd known it. He has been an NBA and NHL owner for years. It just doesn't wash for me that he'd be patient and stand back for every other team he owns while his personality would totally change for this one. It's possible, but I just don't buy it. Josh Harris bought the 76ers in 2011. That's eleven years of data as to how he acts in good times and bad as an owner. In addition, we've got to see how he acts as a first year owner in two (it might be three) major sports leagues.
 
There is no doubt in my mind that at least 3 of the prospective QBs will be included in the 30 visits later on. Will Harris be in those interviews too? And by that point in the process, when the majority of the evaluation work will be in the can, should he?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top