Giants expected to start GM interviews next week. Unlikely to name one before end of the season so they don't miss chance to talk to candidates currently with teams.
Sounds like they are being thorough, but to me, the longer it takes
I understand a team wanted to interview him last year for vacant GM position, but GB denied. How can they deny a team interviewing him as it would be a promotion?
I understand a team wanted to interview him last year for vacant GM position, but GB denied. How can they deny a team interviewing him as it would be a promotion?
There aren't those kind of rules for front office types. He was under contract thus the team has the say so.
even if the giants wanted to fire Ross, doing so while in the midst of draft prep just doesn't happen in the NFL.
People will go apeshit because they don't know the process, but if he's still around two weeks after the draft, then people can go ballistic.
Yeah I know, that seems to be the norm. But I would ask: wouldn't a serious candidate be doing his own draft prep work and at least have an idea of what he would be looking for? Especially today with internet making film so readily available?
And I guess the rationale could be used that the work lately has been crap - but there is so much analysis that goes into things behind the scenes - interviews of coaches, reports about character concerns - things we just don't have visibility in - and that an outside person might not either.
Tape review is a critical part of evaluation, but only one piece of the equation.
But then again replacing the team in mid-stream- it is probably like going for it on 4th down inside your own territory - it might statistically be a good idea, but if you fail - watch the fuck out.
saying yesterday that Gettleman was all but a done deal was fake news?
Or more likely it was Mike being the blowhard, know-it-all that he is.
If they pick Gettleman, the truth is we'll never really know. They may have him pegged from the start (kind of like McAdoo) and may be putting on a kabuki show to make it look like they are being "thorough." Or they may legitimate be considering all candidates equal.
I hate to be this way, but I think kabuki show is more likely
And I guess the rationale could be used that the work lately has been crap - but there is so much analysis that goes into things behind the scenes - interviews of coaches, reports about character concerns - things we just don't have visibility in - and that an outside person might not either.
Tape review is a critical part of evaluation, but only one piece of the equation.
But then again replacing the team in mid-stream- it is probably like going for it on 4th down inside your own territory - it might statistically be a good idea, but if you fail - watch the fuck out.
We also don't know the quality of each scouts work. The individual scouts could be very good at their jobs, and Reese/Ross made bad decisions based of their work.
These guys are compiling data, it's just what a scout does. There are observations, notes, personal data, etc. but it's still data. It's up to the person who selects players to analyze, review, verify, validate and apply the data to a process. A guy who is 6-1 who Jerry Reese may ignore but a scout loves at LB may be a guy who the new GM has a higher grade because he doesn't cut down LBs because of height. He's still 6-1 though.
These guys are compiling data, it's just what a scout does. There are observations, notes, personal data, etc. but it's still data. It's up to the person who selects players to analyze, review, verify, validate and apply the data to a process. A guy who is 6-1 who Jerry Reese may ignore but a scout loves at LB may be a guy who the new GM has a higher grade because he doesn't cut down LBs because of height. He's still 6-1 though.
Exactly. Everyone gets on the Ross and the scouts but we don't know if the information they are gathering is being used properly or not. Either way I would like to see the new GM make that call.
RE: I hate to be this way, but I think kabuki show is more likely
and they can also perform their due diligence honestly. It's not one or the other. Interviewing other candidates and then choosing Gettleman does not mean it wasn't a legitimate search. Never understood why we did that with the coaching hire or why we're doing it now.
doesn't need to keep Ross here, the draft is in April, not January folks. That is a load of crap, that they need to keep him around until the draft...What the Giants wouldn't have
the same info. if Ross is gone?
and they can also perform their due diligence honestly. It's not one or the other. Interviewing other candidates and then choosing Gettleman does not mean it wasn't a legitimate search. Never understood why we did that with the coaching hire or why we're doing it now.
.
That's how I see it, with Mac, I stated previously they were
afraid of losing him to another organization, ie., the Eagles
for one.
Belongs to former teams, such as spreadsheets what have you. Their knowledge is their own, so you get some of your lost time back with the hire.
In addition. We have routinely done better (only within the narrow yask of draft) with a few minutes here and there in the internet, so not to worry about lost time.
Clear and quick thinking. Concepts and big picture. Trends....yes those may become helpful in a momentary sense on draft day.
I said above. Getting rid of the head scouts prior to the draft can happen, but it very rarely does - and with good reason. This is literally an entire team's only focus and you end up risking losing 6 months of work:
Quote:
A new GM
Carson53 : 12:47 pm : link : reply
doesn't need to keep Ross here, the draft is in April, not January folks. That is a load of crap, that they need to keep him around until the draft...What the Giants wouldn't have
the same info. if Ross is gone?
And I guess the rationale could be used that the work lately has been crap - but there is so much analysis that goes into things behind the scenes - interviews of coaches, reports about character concerns - things we just don't have visibility in - and that an outside person might not either.
Tape review is a critical part of evaluation, but only one piece of the equation.
But then again replacing the team in mid-stream- it is probably like going for it on 4th down inside your own territory - it might statistically be a good idea, but if you fail - watch the fuck out.
There's an argument that we'd be better off drafting from Mike Mayock's board than the one we've been using.
even if the giants wanted to fire Ross, doing so while in the midst of draft prep just doesn't happen in the NFL.
People will go apeshit because they don't know the process, but if he's still around two weeks after the draft, then people can go ballistic.
Yeah I know, that seems to be the norm. But I would ask: wouldn't a serious candidate be doing his own draft prep work and at least have an idea of what he would be looking for? Especially today with internet making film so readily available?
How? What if he is in a different position? Also, as he moves to our GM spot, it's not like he is going to his former employer and ask for their compliled scouting reports and photocopy them. The new GM would need Ross and the scouts until after the draft and rely on the compiled reports and their input. After the draft, then you can get rid of everyone. But it would be foolish in my opinion to get rid of them before the draft.
Belongs to former teams, such as spreadsheets what have you. Their knowledge is their own, so you get some of your lost time back with the hire.
In addition. We have routinely done better (only within the narrow yask of draft) with a few minutes here and there in the internet, so not to worry about lost time.
Clear and quick thinking. Concepts and big picture. Trends....yes those may become helpful in a momentary sense on draft day.
Is any of this stream of consciousness even coherent?
Ross and co are here regardless to after the draft. Cant fire Ross yet.
People will go apeshit because they don't know the process, but if he's still around two weeks after the draft, then people can go ballistic.
There aren't those kind of rules for front office types. He was under contract thus the team has the say so.
People will go apeshit because they don't know the process, but if he's still around two weeks after the draft, then people can go ballistic.
Yeah I know, that seems to be the norm. But I would ask: wouldn't a serious candidate be doing his own draft prep work and at least have an idea of what he would be looking for? Especially today with internet making film so readily available?
And I guess the rationale could be used that the work lately has been crap - but there is so much analysis that goes into things behind the scenes - interviews of coaches, reports about character concerns - things we just don't have visibility in - and that an outside person might not either.
Tape review is a critical part of evaluation, but only one piece of the equation.
But then again replacing the team in mid-stream- it is probably like going for it on 4th down inside your own territory - it might statistically be a good idea, but if you fail - watch the fuck out.
Or more likely it was Mike being the blowhard, know-it-all that he is.
Or more likely it was Mike being the blowhard, know-it-all that he is.
If they pick Gettleman, the truth is we'll never really know. They may have him pegged from the start (kind of like McAdoo) and may be putting on a kabuki show to make it look like they are being "thorough." Or they may legitimate be considering all candidates equal.
And I guess the rationale could be used that the work lately has been crap - but there is so much analysis that goes into things behind the scenes - interviews of coaches, reports about character concerns - things we just don't have visibility in - and that an outside person might not either.
Tape review is a critical part of evaluation, but only one piece of the equation.
But then again replacing the team in mid-stream- it is probably like going for it on 4th down inside your own territory - it might statistically be a good idea, but if you fail - watch the fuck out.
We also don't know the quality of each scouts work. The individual scouts could be very good at their jobs, and Reese/Ross made bad decisions based of their work.
Exactly. Everyone gets on the Ross and the scouts but we don't know if the information they are gathering is being used properly or not. Either way I would like to see the new GM make that call.
I think Gettleman might be the safe fallback option, but I doubt they have him pegged already.
the same info. if Ross is gone?
That's how I see it, with Mac, I stated previously they were
afraid of losing him to another organization, ie., the Eagles
for one.
In addition. We have routinely done better (only within the narrow yask of draft) with a few minutes here and there in the internet, so not to worry about lost time.
Clear and quick thinking. Concepts and big picture. Trends....yes those may become helpful in a momentary sense on draft day.
Carson53 : 12:47 pm : link : reply
doesn't need to keep Ross here, the draft is in April, not January folks. That is a load of crap, that they need to keep him around until the draft...What the Giants wouldn't have
the same info. if Ross is gone?
And I guess the rationale could be used that the work lately has been crap - but there is so much analysis that goes into things behind the scenes - interviews of coaches, reports about character concerns - things we just don't have visibility in - and that an outside person might not either.
Tape review is a critical part of evaluation, but only one piece of the equation.
But then again replacing the team in mid-stream- it is probably like going for it on 4th down inside your own territory - it might statistically be a good idea, but if you fail - watch the fuck out.
There's an argument that we'd be better off drafting from Mike Mayock's board than the one we've been using.
Quote:
even if the giants wanted to fire Ross, doing so while in the midst of draft prep just doesn't happen in the NFL.
People will go apeshit because they don't know the process, but if he's still around two weeks after the draft, then people can go ballistic.
Yeah I know, that seems to be the norm. But I would ask: wouldn't a serious candidate be doing his own draft prep work and at least have an idea of what he would be looking for? Especially today with internet making film so readily available?
How? What if he is in a different position? Also, as he moves to our GM spot, it's not like he is going to his former employer and ask for their compliled scouting reports and photocopy them. The new GM would need Ross and the scouts until after the draft and rely on the compiled reports and their input. After the draft, then you can get rid of everyone. But it would be foolish in my opinion to get rid of them before the draft.
In addition. We have routinely done better (only within the narrow yask of draft) with a few minutes here and there in the internet, so not to worry about lost time.
Clear and quick thinking. Concepts and big picture. Trends....yes those may become helpful in a momentary sense on draft day.
Is any of this stream of consciousness even coherent?