He is the appointed CEO who also owns a pretty small minority ownership % and sits on the franchises Board of Directors. The Giants are a 50/50 joint venture in which one half is owned by the Tisch siblings, who are far richer and more powerful than the Mara clan. I understand that a CEO will weigh in on certain decisions - that’s conventional - while leaving most decisions to qualified professionals. John Mara’s actions are consistent with a CEO role, but that role was granted to him as an act of nepotism. He’s a nepo baby.
Mara acts as a CEO, not an owner, and reports to the Giants’ Board, of which he is a member. The board has 9 members, 4 of whom appear to be appointed by Tisch and 5 by the Maras. I say apparently because information about one of the board members, Nicole Covello, is hard to come by. That’s the formal structure. Informally, the Tisches have other things to worry about, though the Giants represent a significant part of their net worth, and the Maras are more focused on the franchise. In what looks like a compromise between the 50/50 partners, Steve Tisch serves as the Board Chairman, while Mara is the CEO. Tisch is 75 and if he dies power may devolve to Jonathan Tisch, his brother, age 70, who serves as the Board Treasurer. The people overseeing this organization are old and given the solid business footing of NFL franchises, that makes for a lot of inertia. But it wouldn’t be surprising if the Board saw a lot of turnover in the next decade. It’s worth mentioning that Jonathan Tisch is a real businessman, he was CEO of Loews, a publicly traded firm, until last year, while Larry is a film producer. Their sister, Laurie Tisch, also serves on the Board and is 73, and doesn’t appear to be a career woman. (Note that one of her daughters appears to be a real executive.) All the Tisches are billionaires, so these people are seriously rich.
Nepotism and nepotism babies are spread across the Giants organization very thoroughly. One question I have been wondering is why Tim McDonnell would be viewed as the CEO heir apparent. Why not hire a veteran sports executive as the next Giants CEO? Both sets of families are used to treating businesses as family ventures. For example, Jonathan Tisch stepped aside as CEO of Loews, a publicly traded company, and his son Alex succeeded him.
Why hasn’t Mara been fired? Because the Giants are profitable, have a board majority and exist in a monopoly setting in which even an incompetent fool like him can lead the Giants organization. The situation is different from, say, the Panthers where an incompetent 100% owner David Tepper and his wife Caroline, the Panthers’ Chief Administrative Officer, have total control. The Giants org structure shows signs of a very political, negotiated arrangement.
The other thing that jumps out is that the Tisch family is embedded in the hospitality industry. That’s why they are rich. Loews isn’t an enormous company but it is sizable and the Tisch family has a lot of investments in addition to it. So we fans look at the Giants from the lens of a team, but the Tisches likely have a different perspective, viewing it as an entertainment venue. It’s possible that the “sub optimal” Met Life as a venue may be more pressing to the Tisches than the teams losing record.
My takeaways:
- Both sets of owners are used to treating their companies as family ventures.
- The management structure of the franchise is negotiated in a complex web. The situation is now stable but complex webs are unstable and can change.
- None of the principal players has firmly demonstrated competence and ability, although it’s possible that Jonathan Tisch is an accomplished businessman and leader.
- Jonathan is now quasi retired and may now play a bigger role in the Giants than when he was running his business. That’s something to watch for.
- The Board is old. We could see significant turnover there or the current membership could persist for a decade or two.
Quote:
In comment 16556662 Orville Redenbacher said:
Quote:
You are missing a lot of nuance in your quite frankly inaccurate statement that we are closer to better owners than worse.
and like your new handles your statements pretend the past that doesnt suit your shitty arguments never happened.
john mara was COO from the 90's to 2005 when he became CEO. kind of stupid to focus only on one decade of his time in the job when he has 2. his father were the driving force behind hiring Coughlin but at the time he was obviously not able to fully run the organization, so it was likely John who saw to that happening. They both obviously allowed Accorsi to make the trade for Eli. One of his first big hiring decisions was promoting Jerry Reese to Gm. how did that go?
his even more important unpopular decision was correctly choosing to not "fire coughlin" more than once before SB42 when all of the over reactionary geniuses with no concept of how hard it is to actually find good coaches (like you) wanted him gone even after winning seasons.
if you want to knock all of his decisions in the post-Couglin/Reese world that's fair because they've sucked. If you want to pretend the guy is on the level of woody johnson, or dan snyder, or the jerry richardson, or the wilponzis, or james dolan or donald sterling whoever anyone who in reality would be considered the actual worst owners in sports then you need to turn in any fond memories you may have accrued prior with SB 42/46.
Jesus, why are you so obsessed with the idea that someone disagreeing with you needs to have some kind of history? Maybe your points are just bad?
Such as the point that you made that the Giants owners were closer to the best than the worst. Their record shows they are closer to Woody Johnson than a good owner. The only pretending taking place is that we should ignore that record because you like them or something.
The onus is on you to prove that they are closer to the better owners, my argument is supported.
your argument is only supported by you cherry picking your history. John Mara started running the day to day in the early 2000's, since then how many owners have more than his 2 SB rings? how many owners have 1?
Get a grip dude.
10 years of bottom of the industry performance as a CEO of a multi-billion entity gets you fired typically. You might as well be talking about him inveting the walkman.
Telling someone they are cherry picking with 10 years of data is intellectually dishonst.
Get a grip dude.
10 years of bottom of the industry performance as a CEO of a multi-billion entity gets you fired typically. You might as well be talking about him inveting the walkman.
Telling someone they are cherry picking with 10 years of data is intellectually dishonst.
using someone's entire history isn't intellectually dishonest or cherry picking, it's reality.
since you're into intellectual honesty, why dont you confirm your prior handle(s)?
You seem to be confused by that, and really a lot of things so this is all of my time that I have for you on this one bucko.
You seem to be confused by that, and really a lot of things so this is all of my time that I have for you on this one bucko.
Since 2008, the Rooney family has brought in several investors for the team while retaining control of the team itself. This came about so that the team could comply with NFL ownership regulations. Dan Rooney, and his son, Art Rooney II, president of the franchise, wanted to stay involved with the franchise, while two of the brothers – Timothy and Patrick – wanted to further pursue racetracks that they own in Florida and New York
using someone's entire history isn't intellectually dishonest or cherry picking, it's reality.
since you're into intellectual honesty, why dont you confirm your prior handle(s)?
Those SBs under Mara's "watch" are approaching distant memory status. The last one was twelve seasons ago. Since then, there have been three winning seasons, two playoff appearances, one playoff win, and an overall record of 76-118-1 (39%).
That is a lot of data to suggest we have become a poorly run franchise - consistently - under Mara's watch.
And let's not act like those last two SB seasons were predictable. They came out of nowhere. That doesn't diminish the outcome, but they were very much the magic carpet ride variety.
Quote:
using someone's entire history isn't intellectually dishonest or cherry picking, it's reality.
since you're into intellectual honesty, why dont you confirm your prior handle(s)?
Those SBs under Mara's "watch" are approaching distant memory status. The last one was twelve seasons ago. Since then, there have been three winning seasons, two playoff appearances, one playoff win, and an overall record of 76-118-1 (39%).
That is a lot of data to suggest we have become a poorly run franchise - consistently - under Mara's watch.
And let's not act like those last two SB seasons were predictable. They came out of nowhere. That doesn't diminish the outcome, but they were very much the magic carpet ride variety.
ownerships dont turn over like coaches or gms. the time horizon is very different so judging them is different than wins and losses over a partial period.
the super bowls may have been "magic carpet" but over the full coughlin era they were usually .500 or better. do you think hiring jerry reese was an important element of that? tom coughlin? the eli manning trade/extensions? those were all elements of the magic carpet and the vast majority of owners have zero rings magic carpet or otherwise.
Quote:
In comment 16556574 seanr said:
Quote:
I suggest most people on this board think about changing teams. The Maras started the Giants and the are the majority owners.
You can bitch all you want but that that is the way its going to stay for awhile.
The Giants are in this predicament because they have drafted poorly and more importantly not developed their own players.
Good post!
Bitching about your favorite teams ownership is like pissing and moaning about the brand of car you choose to drive. This team has been the possession of the Mara family since 1925. It aint going to change nor should it. If you hate John Mara so much go root for another team. The guy, by all accounts sounds like a tremendous person to work for.
This post shows a stunning lack of awareness about how fandom works. When the team you grew up loving is making the same mistakes over and over again, it is natural to get frustrated with those situations and complain about them. Nobody on here has ever seriously suggested the Maras and Tiches sell the team - they complain about John Mara’s terrible football instincts being a large factor in decisions. Full stop.
Saying “go route for another team” is like telling people if their preferred political candidate loses an election, they should move to another country. It’s a 5 year old’s understanding of the world.
Actually that’s EXACTLY what I am suggesting. I wish the Manning family would/could purchase this franchise and bring it back to the glory that is used to me. Great football mind to bring in the talent and find the right people to manage. I can dream
Quote:
Art Rooney was the founder and owner of the team, from its establishment as a semi-independent team in the Western Pennsylvania Professional Football Circuit in 1921 until his death in 1988. Following Art's death, ownership of the franchise transferred to Art's oldest son, Dan Rooney. Front office operations have passed from Dan Rooney to his son and current team president, Art Rooney II, in 2017 upon the death of Dan Rooney.
Since 2008, the Rooney family has brought in several investors for the team while retaining control of the team itself. This came about so that the team could comply with NFL ownership regulations. Dan Rooney, and his son, Art Rooney II, president of the franchise, wanted to stay involved with the franchise, while two of the brothers – Timothy and Patrick – wanted to further pursue racetracks that they own in Florida and New York
Giants have one of the 3rd worst record over the past 10 years, the Steelers haven't been under .500 since 2003.
Its not the nepotism that bothers people as much as it is the fact that they're doubling down on a CEO that clearly doesn't know how to run a successful football team because of it. The bottom line is if John were hired to run this team, he likely would have been let go years ago.
Quote:
bitch and moan this much about the Rooney's and their nepotism? It's never ending with some on the board. With the access to watch every team in the NFL, its easier than ever to watch other teams and find one that aligns with your way of thinking. Probably will reduce the amount of stress in your life
Quote:
Art Rooney was the founder and owner of the team, from its establishment as a semi-independent team in the Western Pennsylvania Professional Football Circuit in 1921 until his death in 1988. Following Art's death, ownership of the franchise transferred to Art's oldest son, Dan Rooney. Front office operations have passed from Dan Rooney to his son and current team president, Art Rooney II, in 2017 upon the death of Dan Rooney.
Since 2008, the Rooney family has brought in several investors for the team while retaining control of the team itself. This came about so that the team could comply with NFL ownership regulations. Dan Rooney, and his son, Art Rooney II, president of the franchise, wanted to stay involved with the franchise, while two of the brothers – Timothy and Patrick – wanted to further pursue racetracks that they own in Florida and New York
Giants have one of the 3rd worst record over the past 10 years, the Steelers haven't been under .500 since 2003.
Its not the nepotism that bothers people as much as it is the fact that they're doubling down on a CEO that clearly doesn't know how to run a successful football team because of it. The bottom line is if John were hired to run this team, he likely would have been let go years ago.
the rooneys were fortunate to have a really strong gm (kevin colbert) for 21 years and even more fortunate for him to started his career sharing a number of years with a HOF coach (cowher).
the giants could have been fortunate enough to have the same with Reese, except when he got his chance to hire a coach they hired a lemon instead of mike tomlin. so while successful, his tenure ended halfway through what it could/should have been.
tomlin has been there for 15 years now and you can bet he made things a lot easier to transition to new GM omar khan a couple years ago. colbert's last 1st round pick kenny pickett tanked in Khan's first year but they were still a good team because they have a good coach who has them compteitive regardless of circumstances.
id also suggest there's always some grass is greener - the last time the steelers won a playoff game ben eli and macadoo were still wearing blue (2016) so i guarantee the steel curtain interactive forum isnt all sunshine and rainbows (pretty sure ive seen some low murmur 'fire tomlin' stuff in the wild though that may not be representative). they have negative point differentials in 4 of the last 5 years despite winning records. which is imo the value of a great coach and the absolute last thing they should consider doing is moving on from tomlin even if he hasnt won a playoff game in almost a decade.
ownerships dont turn over like coaches or gms. the time horizon is very different so judging them is different than wins and losses over a partial period.
the super bowls may have been "magic carpet" but over the full coughlin era they were usually .500 or better. do you think hiring jerry reese was an important element of that? tom coughlin? the eli manning trade/extensions? those were all elements of the magic carpet and the vast majority of owners have zero rings magic carpet or otherwise.
I don't know what a partial period is.
Again, it's been over a decade. Twelve years. For any reasonable person, that seems like a credible amount of time to pass judgement.
But help me understand your overall point. Are you suggesting that criticizing Mara/ownership is off limits?
Quote:
ownerships dont turn over like coaches or gms. the time horizon is very different so judging them is different than wins and losses over a partial period.
the super bowls may have been "magic carpet" but over the full coughlin era they were usually .500 or better. do you think hiring jerry reese was an important element of that? tom coughlin? the eli manning trade/extensions? those were all elements of the magic carpet and the vast majority of owners have zero rings magic carpet or otherwise.
I don't know what a partial period is.
Again, it's been over a decade. Twelve years. For any reasonable person, that seems like a credible amount of time to pass judgement.
But help me understand your overall point. Are you suggesting that criticizing Mara/ownership is off limits?
'partial' isn't exactly a complicated word to understand. a subset as opposed to an entire thing.
i never suggested criticizing mara/ownership is off limits, i've done it plenty myself including earlier in the thread. his track record of poor hiring decisions post-Reese/Coughlin speaks for itself.
my overall point has been that he is farther from the worst owners than the best because over his first full decade he had one of the better runs of any nfl org in the modern era. i'm also fairly certain the version of "great owner" in most people's heads doesnt even actually exist anywhere. it wasn't long ago david tepper was everyone's white knight when he boldly 'stole' matt rhule. how did that work out? before stumbling into andy reid, clark hunt wasnt doing so hot either. anyone think he ends up with patrick mahomes or a dynasty if philadelphia hadnt fired andy reid?
Listen, people will STFU when we start winning consistently. It's really that simple.
Listen, people will STFU when we start winning consistently. It's really that simple.
i would venture to guess that something like 28 teams are routinely cursing their ownerships/management. maybe higher. kraft helped build a modern dynasty that will never be topped, and the tide is even turning on him (and the rest of the front office he has listed on his website...which is his son).
jeffrey lurie is one of the only owners i can think of whose teams have been consistently good for almost his entire tenure, his 1 super bowl win with foles was lucky but he got there 2 other times with different coaches each time.
i can think of a lot of others who were a lot worse than mara.
some might call it a tragic kingdom.
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
some might call it a tragic kingdom.
It makes for many a depressing Sunday morning.
my overall point has been that he is farther from the worst owners than the best because over his first full decade he had one of the better runs of any nfl org in the modern era. i'm also fairly certain the version of "great owner" in most people's heads doesnt even actually exist anywhere. it wasn't long ago david tepper was everyone's white knight when he boldly 'stole' matt rhule. how did that work out? before stumbling into andy reid, clark hunt wasnt doing so hot either. anyone think he ends up with patrick mahomes or a dynasty if philadelphia hadnt fired andy reid?
The record of the organization since the last SB win is without dispute - one of the worst performances in the NFL over the last 12 years. And those twelve years is more than a credible "partial period" to pass judgment on the Mara's stewardship.
Look the NFL is dynamic, and things can certainly change. But right now, Mara is closer to being in the worst group of owners than the best group right now.
If Mara wasn't so sentimental about trying to extend Eli's career for one more magic run (or two), and if he didn't predictably hire that dolt Gettleman based on Accorsi's fake wide search, perhaps a lot of this could have been avoided. The number of bad decisions in the eight-year window is astounding. And nearly all of it can be traced right back to Mara.
i dont recall having ever deployed that strategy during a fun playoff season like 2022 as you did, but different strokes for different folks i guess.
Quote:
my overall point has been that he is farther from the worst owners than the best because over his first full decade he had one of the better runs of any nfl org in the modern era. i'm also fairly certain the version of "great owner" in most people's heads doesnt even actually exist anywhere. it wasn't long ago david tepper was everyone's white knight when he boldly 'stole' matt rhule. how did that work out? before stumbling into andy reid, clark hunt wasnt doing so hot either. anyone think he ends up with patrick mahomes or a dynasty if philadelphia hadnt fired andy reid?
The record of the organization since the last SB win is without dispute - one of the worst performances in the NFL over the last 12 years. And those twelve years is more than a credible "partial period" to pass judgment on the Mara's stewardship.
Look the NFL is dynamic, and things can certainly change. But right now, Mara is closer to being in the worst group of owners than the best group right now.
If Mara wasn't so sentimental about trying to extend Eli's career for one more magic run (or two), and if he didn't predictably hire that dolt Gettleman based on Accorsi's fake wide search, perhaps a lot of this could have been avoided. The number of bad decisions in the eight-year window is astounding. And nearly all of it can be traced right back to Mara.
in the nfl as in life almost all gets traced back to good or bad hiring decisions. problem is statistically the vast majority of high level nfl hires are bad. that game is rigged against. there are very few proven coaches and the few that are do not hit often hit the open market.
bad decisions have hit mara the same as arthur blank, david tepper, jerry jones, dan snyder, the davis family, the spanos family, the kroenke family, the hunt family, the brown family, jimmy haslem, the richardson family, the mcnair family, and all manner of billionaire elites who've conquered other industries just the same.
you may recall the popular choice over gettleman was john dorsey, who i think briefly became the highest paid GM in the nfl for the browns. how did things work out for him outside of andy reid's shadow? about the same as matt rhule and tepper.
You know who is very competent and arguably brilliant? Steve Bisciotti, who owns the Ravens. Surprise, surprise.
So earlier you were saying that it is really all about the coach, and I imagine a franchise QB would help too.
You want to give John Mara credit for that early success when he wasn't even in charge when those choices were made?
Can you imagine sitting in a meeting about evaluating someone and saying ignore the data from the last 10 years. All I care about data 12 years and older!
You don't even realize how bad other parts of your argument are either.
Saying that other owners are bad and the position never really changes doesn't help your point.
John Mara's results stand out as poor even amongst that group of nepotists that can't lose their jobs.
You seem to lack self awareness about your bias. But hey! That makes you exactly like John Mara! No wonder you want to die on this rediculous hill where you cherry pick old, old data and accuse others of cherry picking on a VERY reasonable set of data.
Can we start with the last statement; what evidence do you have that all the 'bad' decisions actually trace back to John Mara.
More to your point, I believe you have the history of that period totally wrong. First, the Giants actually started to make the move to move on from Eli when they selected Davis Webb at the 2017 draft. And the botched 'replacement' of Eli with Geno Smith that fall was supposed to be the next step. Ironically if they had started Webb instead that day, no matter how badly he played, Reese/McAdoo might still be around.
There is also every indication that the Giants were all-in on getting a QB with the 2nd pick in the 2018 draft. Certainly no team did more due diligence on the QBs than the Giants did that spring. In the end, though, they decided (see below) that none of the QBs available were worth the pick (as did pretty much the rest of the league) and they ended up taking Barkley, the best player available (by far) instead.
Re Gettleman: The Giants had a long-term plan to replace Reese with Abrams when the former opted to retire, but everything got accelerated when Reese was unexpectedly fired at the end of the 2017 season. The plan was still to ultimately promote Abrams but he didn't have much in the way of personnel experience so they went looking for someone with that kind of experience to at least shepherd them thru the transition from the Eli era, and Gettleman, a personnel guy with GM experience and Giants ties was the perfect candidate. Didn't quite work out the way they wanted, but it was hardly moronic. Indeed, it was widely cheered on this board at the time.
As an aside speaking of the ownership business, the Giants had a big front-office meeting about ten days ahead of the 2018 draft (if my memory serves me correctly I believe Eric reported it). We never heard what it was about, but I suspect that the personnel people wanted to report that they had come to the conclusion that a QB wasn't in the cards and they wanted to go in another direction.
If you send me headshots maybe I can get you a role in my next film!
So earlier you were saying that it is really all about the coach, and I imagine a franchise QB would help too.
You want to give John Mara credit for that early success when he wasn't even in charge when those choices were made?
Can you imagine sitting in a meeting about evaluating someone and saying ignore the data from the last 10 years. All I care about data 12 years and older!
You don't even realize how bad other parts of your argument are either.
Saying that other owners are bad and the position never really changes doesn't help your point.
John Mara's results stand out as poor even amongst that group of nepotists that can't lose their jobs.
You seem to lack self awareness about your bias. But hey! That makes you exactly like John Mara! No wonder you want to die on this rediculous hill where you cherry pick old, old data and accuse others of cherry picking on a VERY reasonable set of data.
holy shit your inability to understand simple history is matched only by hopeless depravity.
john mara was running the franchise years before coughlin was hired or eli drafted because his father was well into his 80's. any simple google search will turn up articles like the one lined below from aug 2003. wellington was literally battling freaking cancer less than a year after the hiring of coughlin/drafting eli, before passing early in their just their second seasons. Even if you dont want to give john mara credit for hiring coughlin since it was wellington's expressed preference, he chose to keep him when trolling schmucks like you had their pitchforks out in 06-07. Jerry Reese was promoted to GM 2 years after Wellington passed.
https://www.forbes.com/2003/08/29/cz_mb_0829giants.html - ( New Window )
Maybe, just maybe, Wellington kept John's influence at bay. Because we sure as hell know if it isn't time is not kind to what that looks like.
Why are you dying on this hill? You aren't making good arguments? And you are accusing me of weird things and getting agitated.
You should be agitated with yourself for making these bad points and grinding yourself into the ground with them.
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
You know who is very competent and arguably brilliant? Steve Bisciotti, who owns the Ravens. Surprise, surprise.
Think the Giants even considered drafting Lamar? Well, we've seen on Hard Knocks that they were done drafting a WR who "has some dawg in him"...but Schoen also told us they have a different system for scouting QBs. One suspects they scout for Eli clones that will sell Toyotas and Dunkin Donuts.
I'm fine with the owner interfering if the owner is smart.
Maybe, just maybe, Wellington kept John's influence at bay. Because we sure as hell know if it isn't time is not kind to what that looks like.
Why are you dying on this hill? You aren't making good arguments? And you are accusing me of weird things and getting agitated.
You should be agitated with yourself for making these bad points and grinding yourself into the ground with them.
agitated isn't the right word so much as dumbfounded at volumetric overload of uncut stupidity.
am i understanding this ghost of producer theory correctly that it was the ghost of wellington that ran the org through the 2 SB's in 2008 and 2012 after having passed at 89 in 2005?
why wasn't the franchise running better in the 90's? did he get more powerful posthumously like obi wan?
Re Gettleman: The Giants had a long-term plan to replace Reese with Abrams when the former opted to retire, but everything got accelerated when Reese was unexpectedly fired at the end of the 2017 season. The plan was still to ultimately promote Abrams but he didn't have much in the way of personnel experience so they went looking for someone with that kind of experience to at least shepherd them thru the transition from the Eli era, and Gettleman, a personnel guy with GM experience and Giants ties was the perfect candidate. Didn't quite work out the way they wanted, but it was hardly moronic. Indeed, it was widely cheered on this board at the time.
I was highly critical of the Gettleman hire, particularly the way it was conducted. Many of us predicted it a few days after Mara made Reese and McAdoo his fall guys. The Accorsi search as a joke.
Gettleman was an aging man who was unceremoniously dismissed in Carolina. And I contend a lot of the success Gettleman had in Carolina was with players Marty Hurney acquired - Newton, Kuechly, Norman, Davis, Stewart, Olson, Ginn, etc.
The only reason he got this job was (1) he knew the "Giants Way", which Mara revered, and (2) Accorsi knew that's what Mara wanted. Accorsi has admitted he felt guilty not recommending Gettleman when Reese got the job.
That hire set this organization back at least five years. The guy was an unmitigated disaster from the way he did his job to the way he carried himself...
I'm fine with the owner interfering if the owner is smart.
ah yes the genius of the organization who missed on their first choice jason garrett and had to settle for backup plan john harbough and then took hayden hurst 7 picks ahead of lamar.
credit where it's due they are an excellent organization - mostly thanks to HOF'er Ozzie Newsome whose presence there dates back 3+ decades to legendary fan friendly owner art modell.
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
ah yes the genius of the organization who missed on their first choice jason garrett and had to settle for backup plan john harbough and then took hayden hurst 7 picks ahead of lamar.
So, you are dinging the Ravens because they didn't have Harbaugh as their first HC choice and didn't draft LJax over Hurst?
Are you suggesting they got lucky with those situations?
But instead of cherry picking stats have you thought about considering only data 12 years or older?
You know, the typical way to evaluate performance
Everyone knows the better teams with the better owners have only been winning organizations 12 or more years ago
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
I went with 12 years because I thought that was a credible period of experience vs just a partial period... ;)
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
The same people telling us now to stop being negative were saying that in 2014 as well.
I just don't see the cause for optimism, besides the league being parity-based on order to prop up dumb teams like the Giants.
Quote:
ah yes the genius of the organization who missed on their first choice jason garrett and had to settle for backup plan john harbough and then took hayden hurst 7 picks ahead of lamar.
So, you are dinging the Ravens because they didn't have Harbaugh as their first HC choice and didn't draft LJax over Hurst?
Are you suggesting they got lucky with those situations?
im saying it will help any owner look smart to walk into a situation that already has a super bowl winning HOF gm.
any breaks ozzie got id considered earned because everyone gets breaks every now and then, but yes those were 2 very important breaks he got that basically defined the last 12 years or so of raven football (and certainly helped what otherwise would have been a difficult transition beyond ozzie).
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
the better way to assess ownerships is over their full time horizons whatever that is - nobody is disputing the reality that the giants have sucked the last decade.
Quote:
In comment 16557233 Go Terps said:
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
The same people telling us now to stop being negative were saying that in 2014 as well.
I just don't see the cause for optimism, besides the league being parity-based on order to prop up dumb teams like the Giants.
humor me, what exactly was the claim against mara in 2014?
ronnie barnes the reason nicks/cruz got injured?
and that snee retired early?
or the drafts went to shit?
that they chose to pay injury prone players like schwartz/beason over someone like linval joseph?
in 2014 off 2 super bowls in 6 years what was a non-meddling owner supposed to do exactly?
worst = khan .307 (harris technically lower at .235 but only 1 year)
mara family = .526 all time (14th)
john 2005+ = .471 (would rank 22nd)
an amazing statistical quirk - tom coughlin was exactly .531 in both jax (68-60) and nyg (102-90) as head coach.
from 2005-2017 when Reese got fired JM was 110-98 (.528).
wheels off w/ dg/shurmur/judge (19-46, .292).
through 2 years daboll/schoen are .454.
in case it's not obvious enough when he's had competent coach/gm he was slightly above avg. when he's had to hire new ones he's sucked (which is probably why he always tried to outsource).
should also be in the "obvious" category that the jury is still out on this regime, but in case it's not #2 on the list is the pegula's, who took over in 2014 but are in that slot bc after firing rex ryan they nailed the mcdermott hire in 2017 (.640). through 2 years however he had the same win totals as daboll (9 yr 1 & 6 yr 2) with big negative point differentials each year. i'm not saying that's predictive of anything but i bet bills fans in 2019 weren't overflowing with optimism. they hadnt won a playoff game in over 2 decades and were on year 6 with new ownership. they probaby dont even realize it now since mcdermott is on most "hot seat" lists. if they are foolish enough to fire him and dabs doesnt work out id send a jet to buffalo asap, with vrabel and his .545 right behind on standby.
Which current NFL owners have the highest win percentage? - ( New Window )
Boy you just love picking up that shovel and digging a deeper grave.
You obliterate your own argument here. You said John Mara was closer to the best than the worst. 22 out of 32 is literally not that.
It doesn’t matter how much of the decision was John’s or Wellingtons before John took over. Because John wasn’t in charge. Do you know how many businesses change after the torch is officially passed to a son? Wearing the crown is different.
Do you honestly think it is more likely that John Mara was the driving force behind the Giants best moves and then when he was put in charge all of a sudden he couldn’t pick a good GM or coach?
You can grab and twist all the data you want. Your argument is a bad one. You want to talk about if the Giants are a storied franchise great, yes, we agree.
You want to prop up John Mara as a leader when even if you include data 12+ years old, where he was part of group decisions to pick a great coach and QB he STILL is 22nd. And you are dying on the hill that he is “closer to the best.”
Maybe you can accept that again, like Mara you are using data to try to prove out your feelings. But just because you believe it with all your heart doesn’t make it a good point
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
the better way to assess ownerships is over their full time horizons whatever that is - nobody is disputing the reality that the giants have sucked the last decade.
Maybe for a more historical analysis, for instance worst owners of all time. But if the question is who are the worst owners today, a 10-year window seems pretty sufficient.
Just as we wouldn't judge the best privately owned companies today on their earnings 10+ years ago. Extending the window any further teeters on ignoring one of the fundamentals of business and sports -- that people are capable of being formerly good at something.
Win-Loss record is not earnings.
The bottom line is that unless you have studied the Giants business ledger, you have no idea if JM is a good CEO, or a bad one.
There's a lot of opinion bias as to his role in the football side of things. JM is routinely blamed for retaining DJones. but no credit for Dex, or AThomas. I'm guessing JM has a voice, but none of us know how much of a voice, or whether it is the decision making voice regarding the football side of things.
Quote:
There's no doubt there is a large number of incompetent ownership groups on the NFL. There's also no doubt that number includes the Giants.
Fortunately there is a way to assess this, given it's a game where the wins and losses are recorded.
Over the last 10 seasons only 2 teams have won 60 or fewer games, and earned there way into the second round of the playoffs 1 or fewer times -- the Giants and the Jets.
the better way to assess ownerships is over their full time horizons whatever that is - nobody is disputing the reality that the giants have sucked the last decade.
Maybe for a more historical analysis, for instance worst owners of all time. But if the question is who are the worst owners today, a 10-year window seems pretty sufficient.
Just as we wouldn't judge the best privately owned companies today on their earnings 10+ years ago. Extending the window any further teeters on ignoring one of the fundamentals of business and sports -- that people are capable of being formerly good at something.
you think if a F500 CEO had a 12 year run in of top 1/3 performance in their industry, where the company grew by many multiples, and had some inarguable individual award winning product developments, that wouldn't be part of a consideration because of a more recent bad run of poor performance? congrats you've basically just made the case for apple not bringing steve jobs back in 1997 because next was a 12 year performance turd. and no im not saying john mara is steve jobs - just pointing out the insanity of ignoring any sort of business history because running organizations is not a short term endeavor like a head coach.
when looking at pretty apples to apples data (which like growth of a business, wins/losses are) there is no reason to focus only on partial data just because it's more convenient to your argument. bigger sample sizes are almost always better bc more data is better than less data, with the obvious exception being the predictive power of 3rd down only defensive stats from only the most recent season.
if we were to only quantify the stupidity of producer's ghost using this thread it's still pretty impressive but add in his prior posts as darwinian etc and it's obvious he's not playing with a full deck. why ignore history?
Win-Loss record is not earnings.
The bottom line is that unless you have studied the Giants business ledger, you have no idea if JM is a good CEO, or a bad one.
There's a lot of opinion bias as to his role in the football side of things. JM is routinely blamed for retaining DJones. but no credit for Dex, or AThomas. I'm guessing JM has a voice, but none of us know how much of a voice, or whether it is the decision making voice regarding the football side of things.
CEOs are judged on everything. he should be judged on everything important he's done which in my view clearly includes key hires that report to him, especially when your company is basically making 1 product. he can be judged on the stadium, any rules he's proposed/voted for in competition committee, the esteem or lack of esteem people who work for the giants have for the organization, etc. he owns some % of all the organizations successes/failures because that is how leadership works. ignoring the successes he has had and taking out of context the failures is basically just chanting from the cheap seats.
terps gave away the game earlier in the thread when he tried to back pat himself as being on the forefront of this crusade in 2014. sure. 2 years after winning his 2nd SB of the decade, of course it was obvious any competent owner was going to...what? blow things up and clean house? fire jerry reese at age 50 with a 71-58 record? fire coughlin bc it's so easy to find coaches 16 games over .500 who've won super bowls? move on from eli at age 33?
the only owner i can think of who came anywhere close to doing that sort of thing successfully was jeffrey lurie, and even in that scenario (which included 0 super bowl rings) id personally take the side that says moving on from andy reid in 2012 has proven to be a pretty colossal mistake.