|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| George Young, who should be in the NFL Hall of Fame, answered every message. Ernie Accorsi was cut from the same cloth. Even when social media was emerging Jerry Reese always had a bye-week session with the media, even in the darkest of times. |
If offense and defense both flop, I can't imagine the current staff surviving. Shurmur might survive if somehow they can blame the offense's problems on DJ's rookie growing pains. That seems unlikely.
If the offense flops and the defense shows improvement, Shurmur probably goes, and Bettcher probably goes with him. Maybe, if the defense dominates for the last seven games, they could survive that. Also unlikely.
If the offense is better and the defense flops, and Jones shows improvement, Shurmur probably survives but Bettcher is probably gone. Also Shurmur probably has to make some changes, like giving up play calling and hiring a QB coach. They could argue he has too much on his plate right now. That has the advantage of probably being true.
If the offense and defense both improve, they don't go 1-6. That sure would be nice, huh.
It's not a tragedy. He's going to stay quiet, resurface in January. He'll have something cute to say. He'll do the opposite.
He's a little old, but even the old have a chance every day to self assess, critique, and do it a little better the next go.
Does self assess, critique, and then most importantly do it a little better feel like what Dave is all about? That's the big question.
Let me rephrase. No matter the age, there's always a chance for practicing more personal wisdom. Whether Dave can do so this offseason will be critical in his future employment and the immediate term success of the Giants.
The only conclusion one could draw was that ownership requested it as a measure of goodwill with the public. Considering they had been doing it for 20+ years, that would mean that it was happening under Wellington Mara and then continued under John.
But then, all of a sudden they hire Gettleman and he shuts that down with the blessing of ownership? Why was he suddenly given this exemption?
Off season it's the GM.
He wouldn't say anything that would undermine the HC. He's not going to honestly answer any questions as to why the team sucks.
It would just be a public relations affair. If you want to argue whether he should do it for PR purposes, have at it. Highly unlikely you're ever going to get answers to the questions you want asked, no matter what time of year it is, and certainly not in season.
(cant tell you how many posts I wish I could re phrase to reflect what I really meant. Not really a form of communication where most of us work to polish what we write)
Off season it's the GM.
He wouldn't say anything that would undermine the HC. He's not going to honestly answer any questions as to why the team sucks.
It would just be a public relations affair. If you want to argue whether he should do it for PR purposes, have at it. Highly unlikely you're ever going to get answers to the questions you want asked, no matter what time of year it is, and certainly not in season.
good post
Judge DG by his actions. I could care less about what he says or when.
Fans will suddenly feel better about being Giants fans and ‘stay invested’ in the team because DG says they are working to fix the problems, or the problems aren’t as bad as anyone thinks?
Investors are owners. Fans are not. That would be like seeing a bad movie and insisting the director hold a press conference to explain his poor directorial decisions so that people would see his next movie.
You basically re-stated the point.
The Giants are not accountable to fans and do not explain why the team is bad...at best they express "sympathy" and insist they will do better in the future.
They sure don't explain their rationale in a way anyone can depend on.
Off season it's the GM.
He wouldn't say anything that would undermine the HC. He's not going to honestly answer any questions as to why the team sucks.
It would just be a public relations affair. If you want to argue whether he should do it for PR purposes, have at it. Highly unlikely you're ever going to get answers to the questions you want asked, no matter what time of year it is, and certainly not in season.
Apparently Wellington Mara disagreed with you that HC is face in-season and GM is off-season. Where does your stance on that come from anyway? Also, are you saying there can only be one face at a time? How does that jive with owners being consistent faces of the team during in-season and off-season? I don't get confused when I hear from GM's in-season. I'm not clear what you find so confusing about it?
In short, a guy can say nothing, still get criticized and people voicing those complaints think they are actually making solid points.
Fans will suddenly feel better about being Giants fans and ‘stay invested’ in the team because DG says they are working to fix the problems, or the problems aren’t as bad as anyone thinks?
Investors are owners. Fans are not. That would be like seeing a bad movie and insisting the director hold a press conference to explain his poor directorial decisions so that people would see his next movie.
A publicly traded company is under no obligation to bring out certain members of the executive committee and field questions during an earnings call, they do it because they want to instill confidence in their stakeholders (owners) and customers (fans).
Sony definitely makes their executive committee available on earnings calls, and their filmmakers available for press junkets. If a film sucks, the filmmakers hear it.
In all practicality, the Giants do make the equivalent of the filmmaker available for hard questions. The coaches answer questions to the press all of the time.
Do film goers make their decisions on what films to see because the Chief Media Officer of Sony fields questions? Probably not. Do they get a little reassurance that their favorite franchise or series is going to be a priority and get them excited to give Sony their money? Absolutely.
In short, a guy can say nothing, still get criticized and people voicing those complaints think they are actually making solid points.
That has been status quo for some time - when Reese did it, the complaints were that his press conferences didn't say anything. With Gettleman, he just skips it altogether and people get miffed he didn't speak.
At the end of the day - the team stinks, and there's really nothing anyone can say that will give someone solace. You either believe that these guys are the right guys to fix the problem and they have some clue how to get there, or you don't. No amount of talk is going to change that.
Personally, I'm just glad we don't have a new folksy catchphrase to have rehashed 10,000 times over. No more bags of donuts or pretzels, no more hog mollies. Just fix the damn team.
The Giants are not accountable to fans and do not explain why the team is bad...at best they express "sympathy" and insist they will do better in the future.
They sure don't explain their rationale in a way anyone can depend on.
I’m guessing you don’t listen to investor calls often. The goal of an investor call is to explain financial results and how the company is proceeding in the future. It is not to express sympathy and promise to do better next time. That statement is wildly wrong.
So continuing with the analogy, you would expect DG to come out and explain the causes for the 2-8 record and both the short and long term response to improve results? If so, you don’t listen to many football press conference either.
But please...do continue.
Quote:
With a publicly traded company and the need to talk to investors? That may be a new standard in poor analogies.
Fans will suddenly feel better about being Giants fans and ‘stay invested’ in the team because DG says they are working to fix the problems, or the problems aren’t as bad as anyone thinks?
Investors are owners. Fans are not. That would be like seeing a bad movie and insisting the director hold a press conference to explain his poor directorial decisions so that people would see his next movie.
A publicly traded company is under no obligation to bring out certain members of the executive committee and field questions during an earnings call, they do it because they want to instill confidence in their stakeholders (owners) and customers (fans).
Sony definitely makes their executive committee available on earnings calls, and their filmmakers available for press junkets. If a film sucks, the filmmakers hear it.
In all practicality, the Giants do make the equivalent of the filmmaker available for hard questions. The coaches answer questions to the press all of the time.
Do film goers make their decisions on what films to see because the Chief Media Officer of Sony fields questions? Probably not. Do they get a little reassurance that their favorite franchise or series is going to be a priority and get them excited to give Sony their money? Absolutely.
Press junkets are PR events that happen prior to a movies release. They are not done to explain to the public why the movie succeeded or didn’t.
If the analogy was to be as simple as “someone goes before the press to talk about something of interest to the public,” then yes...exact same thing.
Gettleman just didn't realize he needed to start that process right off the bat, and as a result his early communications were a bit verbose & ladened with arrogance...
If the analogy was to be as simple as “someone goes before the press to talk about something of interest to the public,” then yes...exact same thing.
Do you believe the utility of the post-game press conference for the NFL with the coach and players is more to:
1) say something of interest to the public
or:
2) fuel the sports media with information about an entertainment event to ensure there is media coverage of the event
Now, what do you believe the utility of a press junket is?
Do you believe the utility of corporate officers joining an IR call is
1) to be an authority on the legal and regulatory obligations of their 10 k filings
or
2) be the face of the success and/or failure of the organization and engage with their customers and investors
Shareholders are owners of a public entity. Management is accountable to them and has legal and fiduciary responsibilities to account for their actions and results.
A football team has no obligation to fans that choose to follow them. They do it for entertainment purposes only. They have no legal responsibility to account for themselves to anyone other than the team owners.
We said the same things and agree on the points you are making
Did from the start.
I’m guessing you don’t listen to investor calls often. The goal of an investor call is to explain financial results and how the company is proceeding in the future. It is not to express sympathy and promise to do better next time. That statement is wildly wrong.
I've listened to plenty of investor calls. If a company misses their target, they will indeed explain why. And in great detail because investors definitely want to know why. I work in healthcare. If we miss target we will go into many details - flu season, unexpected large claims, higher than expected utilization, etc.
If a company had an issue where something that went seriously wrong, like a Chipotle having a food contamination problem, they will express regret, apologize, and explain how they are fixing the problem.
So those calls are much more than simply talking about financials and offering/confirming guidance.
Hence the contrast with an entity that is/has to be more responsible vs one that is unaccountable.
That's the point and the only point. We should not expect any different from a second generation family hobby/business.
We said the same things and agree on the points you are making
Did from the start.
I misunderstood your original post, Bill2. When I go back and read it in that light I see it now. My apologies.
We should run for office.
In short, a guy can say nothing, still get criticized and people voicing those complaints think they are actually making solid points.
If you're a leader and only speak when things are going well or going in a way that is something you can spin positively then you can certainly be criticized for that. Surely no one is arguing that management leaders shouldn't inform their stakeholders about the status of their business. If Gettlemen said he was postponing the midseason address until after the season because he didn't want to talk specifics when the team was still playing and he gave a commitment to a time period for giving that address, then sure, go ahead and make the argument he's being tactical about how he speaks. Until he makes and fulfills that commitment he gives the perception and actually is, in fact, merely avoiding answering for his work's losing outcome.
Shareholders are owners of a public entity. Management is accountable to them and has legal and fiduciary responsibilities to account for their actions and results.
A football team has no obligation to fans that choose to follow them. They do it for entertainment purposes only. They have no legal responsibility to account for themselves to anyone other than the team owners.
A team has no obligation to fans? Wow
We spent considerable resources on market, investor, and especially consumer sentiment and built and modeled everything, every outcome.
The regulatory and fiduciary responsibilities are typically satisfied by filing reports to the relevant agencies, posting them online, and post marking hard copies for investors.
You don't have to publicly tell a compelling story of why money is invested in a certain way. You don't have to level for your mistakes, paint a picture of the future, justify why hard times now are the seeds of good times later. You don't have to go on CNBC after. You don't have to give a shit. Just drop the tables, and say when the dividend will be deposited.
But it's crazy, when you treat your customers and investors like intellectual equals, some portion of them will be compelled. That's what the data said anyway. Some will spend their money with you when times are tough because they believe things will turn around. Not all, just some. That's the reason it's a production and not prepared remarks and an email.
The Giants are worth ~25% more than the Jets. Same share of the stadium, same metro area, same TV deal. Giants fans give a shit, even when the team sucks. The Giants have gained trust with their fans. If the Giants lose that, and become the Jets, they can probably guess what a floor for their value is.
So sure, not a perfect analogy, and the Giants aren't obligated to do anything, but they better start winning, or convincing their fans they are going to. They already look like the Jets on the field, Mara doesn't want his accounts to look like them too.
Quote:
could have predicted exactly the way this thread has gone.
In short, a guy can say nothing, still get criticized and people voicing those complaints think they are actually making solid points.
If you're a leader and only speak when things are going well or going in a way that is something you can spin positively then you can certainly be criticized for that. Surely no one is arguing that management leaders shouldn't inform their stakeholders about the status of their business. If Gettlemen said he was postponing the midseason address until after the season because he didn't want to talk specifics when the team was still playing and he gave a commitment to a time period for giving that address, then sure, go ahead and make the argument he's being tactical about how he speaks. Until he makes and fulfills that commitment he gives the perception and actually is, in fact, merely avoiding answering for his work's losing outcome.
Gettleman didn't "postpone" anything, and certainly not the midseason address.
He doesn't hold them. Didn't in Carolina, either.
This is basically another way to criticize him for something he's not doing differently in good or bad times.
Quote:
In comment 14681484 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
could have predicted exactly the way this thread has gone.
In short, a guy can say nothing, still get criticized and people voicing those complaints think they are actually making solid points.
If you're a leader and only speak when things are going well or going in a way that is something you can spin positively then you can certainly be criticized for that. Surely no one is arguing that management leaders shouldn't inform their stakeholders about the status of their business. If Gettlemen said he was postponing the midseason address until after the season because he didn't want to talk specifics when the team was still playing and he gave a commitment to a time period for giving that address, then sure, go ahead and make the argument he's being tactical about how he speaks. Until he makes and fulfills that commitment he gives the perception and actually is, in fact, merely avoiding answering for his work's losing outcome.
Gettleman didn't "postpone" anything, and certainly not the midseason address.
He doesn't hold them. Didn't in Carolina, either.
This is basically another way to criticize him for something he's not doing differently in good or bad times.
No one asked what he did in Carolina. He's a Giant now. Giant GMs traditionally hold midseason pressers. He's not holding one. That's not artificially creating a reason to criticize him. He is actually not doing something that Giant GMs do - and he's doing it without the balls of actually owning it.
People pay real money to go to these games. It's not asking a lot to make the same press conference appearance other GMs do, and that players and coaches are obligated to do.
Jesus Christ.
He's still going to be accountable - he's just not serving up a fluff shit sandwich
i don't really care what he did or didn't do in Carolina. it's crazy all the people on here who defend him this way and that and then think that it's too hard for him to put on his big boy pants and talk to the NY press corps. i don't expect him to tell me all his plans, or to throw Shurmur under the bus, but it would be nice to actually have him answer a question or two from someone other than the Giants in-house propaganda voice about the Leonard Williams trade. or maybe give some honest opinion about how well he thinks he's doing his job. he gave an interview with SI in the preseason in which he told us fans to trust him and his staff because they've been around a while and know what they're doing. he said he's been to a lot of Superbowls and he knows what a Superbowl team looks like. now we're halfway through another terrible season and a lot of us are very skeptical. share some thoughts, Dave. help us understand how you see the state of the Giants. or maybe show some humility. you're paid a lot of money to be one of the faces of this organization. 22 year-old DeAndre Baker can stand up and talk to reporters analyzing his mistakes after every rough game but Gettleman can't speak once a year? give me a break
They won't know exactly what the point is of it, but they demand it!!
i don't really care what he did or didn't do in Carolina. it's crazy all the people on here who defend him this way and that and then think that it's too hard for him to put on his big boy pants and talk to the NY press corps. i don't expect him to tell me all his plans, or to throw Shurmur under the bus, but it would be nice to actually have him answer a question or two from someone other than the Giants in-house propaganda voice about the Leonard Williams trade. or maybe give some honest opinion about how well he thinks he's doing his job. he gave an interview with SI in the preseason in which he told us fans to trust him and his staff because they've been around a while and know what they're doing. he said he's been to a lot of Superbowls and he knows what a Superbowl team looks like. now we're halfway through another terrible season and a lot of us are very skeptical. share some thoughts, Dave. help us understand how you see the state of the Giants. or maybe show some humility. you're paid a lot of money to be one of the faces of this organization. 22 year-old DeAndre Baker can stand up and talk to reporters analyzing his mistakes after every rough game but Gettleman can't speak once a year? give me a break
Indeed. Gettleman is 100% responsible for the players, the HC, and the team's record.
Yet it is amazing many are so comfortable with a person with such power hiding away in the Giants Way Witness Protection Program.
If we were winning and competing I'd be fine with this incognito approach. But when we are entering another wasted season the very least this guy can do is face the gauntlet of the NY and national press.
They won't know exactly what the point is of it, but they demand it!!
well, i don't know what the morons need. you seem to have a better grip on that. but sophisticated fans actually expect the GM to be able to speak coherently about the current state of his team, comment on how he evaluates what he has done so far, and give us some idea of his plans going forward and what he expects to see. those are not state secrets. and since no one seems to dispute that he does speak to the press when it suits him, I'm not sure what the defense against speaking midseason - as Giant GMs historically have done -is exactly. that it will hurt their playoff chances? that he doesn't have to so nyah nyah nyah?
So I'll stick with the moron angle. It fits this topic pretty damn well.
So I'll stick with the moron angle. It fits this topic pretty damn well.
So I'll stick with the moron angle. It fits this topic pretty damn well.
Yep, everyone but you is a moron.
There are a lot of good posters on BBI.
There are also a lot of morons.
- Will evaluate Rivera after the season
- Will evaluate the GM after the season
- Will evaluate Cam when he's healthy
- Will not accept mediocrity
- Will take short term losing seasons to build a long-term contender
In short - nothing changed from yesterday to today.
But he talked to reporters. That's the exercise many of you want from Gettleman.