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.
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.
A corpse makes gobs of money running an NFL franchise, especially in NYC.
Most businesses do not collude with their 31 closest competitors to maximize shared revenues like TV contracts.
Not only that, most businesses are judged pretty much only by the money they make. There is no equivalent and clear value like a win-loss record that you’d be hard pressed to find any owner who wouldn’t stress the importance of. I bet owners brag more about wins than profits. Can you think of a parallel in business to that?
Money is paramount in business but other key metrics matter. Extending your logic you could say “The Sackler’s were great leaders they made so much money” I’d hope we need not be so reductive that is the only way we are evaluating leaders. The non-monetary losses they posted beyond profits were as evident as the non-monetary losses the Giants posted.
Beyond that the medium Pepsi? The way he shot his own GM in the foot around negotiations for his most expensive player because he just can’t control the love he has for DJ. These are the markers of a good business man?
And that may have indeed been the case for the Giants and the Maras prior to George Young. A good case could be made that without the Rozelle appointment of Young, this team today would simply be the Browns or the Cardinals. Legacy NFL franchises that are winless in the Super Bowl Era, appearing in just a single championship game between them! But once the Giants got a taste of winning, with the two LT Super Bowls XXI and XXV, the identity and culture of the entire franchise changed. And Ernie Accorsi followed up on George Young's success by delivering the two ELI Super Bowls XLII and XLVI. And today the Lombardi trophy case is the shrine on which this franchise prides itself and for which the fans expect to be competing for every year. It is reminiscent of the "Pretty Woman" quote: "...but now everything is different, and you've changed that. And you can't change back. I want more".
So the argument can be made that the Maras are simply the Wrigleys, skilled in the art of maximizing earnings through kumbaya and fan sentimentality rather than winning championships. And without the very effective assertion of two talented GMs, the Giants would likely still be winless in the Super Bowl era. Which means that the GM in this particular franchise is the causal agent for any success in terms of winning championships. Is Schoen just another Gettleman? Or is he a successor to Young/Accorsi? So far, the results are decidedly mixed and the future appears to be no less murky than the day he arrived.
And that may have indeed been the case for the Giants and the Maras prior to George Young. A good case could be made that without the Rozelle appointment of Young, this team today would simply be the Browns or the Cardinals. Legacy NFL franchises that are winless in the Super Bowl Era, appearing in just a single championship game between them! But once the Giants got a taste of winning, with the two LT Super Bowls XXI and XXV, the identity and culture of the entire franchise changed. And Ernie Accorsi followed up on George Young's success by delivering the two ELI Super Bowls XLII and XLVI. And today the Lombardi trophy case is the shrine on which this franchise prides itself and for which the fans expect to be competing for every year. It is reminiscent of the "Pretty Woman" quote: "...but now everything is different, and you've changed that. And you can't change back. I want more".
So the argument can be made that the Maras are simply the Wrigleys, skilled in the art of maximizing earnings through kumbaya and fan sentimentality rather than winning championships. And without the very effective assertion of two talented GMs, the Giants would likely still be winless in the Super Bowl era. Which means that the GM in this particular franchise is the causal agent for any success in terms of winning championships. Is Schoen just another Gettleman? Or is he a successor to Young/Accorsi? So far, the results are decidedly mixed and the future appears to be no less murky than the day he arrived.
slight correction Mike, yes championships are by far the most important yardstick in sports by which everyone of consequence is first measured, but when it's clear John's championships were won primarily by the ghost of his father, that needs to be taken into account.
If 8 is the line, I think the market would say "Brand X used to live above the line, now they generally live below it."
And again, I am not talking legacy, I am talking snapshot-in-time ability. If we're picking the top guy, who then in turn hires the football leaders, I am certainly not picking John Mara.
1. You were the one that made the point that it is only the coach that matters.
2. Wellington was in charge when TC was hired. You can try to distribute as much credit away from the actual CEO to his son but there is a big hole there.
3. Why could John supposedly spearhead this great coaching choice as a #2 but as the #1 fail at the task miserably the next 3 times. Isn't it possible John not being in charge of that process created better results?
4. The only good coach picked as a #1 happened when he was publicly shamed and his co-owner had to push him to fire the last embarassment. And that good coach will likely be gone because John would rather overpay an marginal QB talent that he loves.
A man with this resume you want to claim was the force behind hiring our last good coach? Without evidence beyond a take down of an old man?
You posted the stat 22/32 for John Mara's tenure. That is factually closer to the worst than the best. Which just completely destroys your original point.
You are telling people they are cherry picking using 10 years of data as you try to use 12+ year old data.
You are so desperate to give John Mara all the credit for a hire when he was not in charge that you are acting like Wellington Mara, a real legend, couldn't find his way home.
You are like John when he criticized the rest of the offense to try to make DJ look better. Your love for John is blinding you from rational thought.
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.
Are you talking about their PnL? Because it's nearly impossible for an NFL team not to be swimming in deep profits. The league prints money.
Quote:
slight correction Mike, yes championships are by far the most important yardstick in sports by which everyone of consequence is first measured, but when it's clear John's championships were won primarily by the ghost of his father, that needs to be taken into account.
1. You were the one that made the point that it is only the coach that matters.
2. Wellington was in charge when TC was hired. You can try to distribute as much credit away from the actual CEO to his son but there is a big hole there.
3. Why could John supposedly spearhead this great coaching choice as a #2 but as the #1 fail at the task miserably the next 3 times. Isn't it possible John not being in charge of that process created better results?
4. The only good coach picked as a #1 happened when he was publicly shamed and his co-owner had to push him to fire the last embarassment. And that good coach will likely be gone because John would rather overpay an marginal QB talent that he loves.
A man with this resume you want to claim was the force behind hiring our last good coach? Without evidence beyond a take down of an old man?
You posted the stat 22/32 for John Mara's tenure. That is factually closer to the worst than the best. Which just completely destroys your original point.
You are telling people they are cherry picking using 10 years of data as you try to use 12+ year old data.
You are so desperate to give John Mara all the credit for a hire when he was not in charge that you are acting like Wellington Mara, a real legend, couldn't find his way home.
You are like John when he criticized the rest of the offense to try to make DJ look better. Your love for John is blinding you from rational thought.
wellington was 88 years old battling cancer when they hired coughlin. he died 2 years before they hired jerry reese. you can create as many handles as you'd like and believe whatever you want.
If 8 is the line, I think the market would say "Brand X used to live above the line, now they generally live below it."
And again, I am not talking legacy, I am talking snapshot-in-time ability. If we're picking the top guy, who then in turn hires the football leaders, I am certainly not picking John Mara.
i agree with that, if i were john mara id have hired someone i trusted with a football background like eli manning, or peyton manning, or tom coughlin, or whoever long ago to support hiring. i dont believe there is a way for a non-football person to know how to hire a football person. every time the HC job has opened up i've campaigned for experienced coaches (like Harbough) and then giving that coach the power to then hire their own GM (as happened in LAC).
by defacto as the giants are set up and have been since GY is that the primary advisor in coaching hires ends up being the GM, but i personally would want someone at a different position than the gm. Joe Schoen never hired a coach before and was never in a player or coach in an NFL lockerroom. Neither had Dave Gettleman. Or Jerry Reese when he chose macadoo. people dont know what they dont know.
coaches get paid like 2x what gms get paid for a reason. they are more important and harder to find.
Quote:
In comment 16557485 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
slight correction Mike, yes championships are by far the most important yardstick in sports by which everyone of consequence is first measured, but when it's clear John's championships were won primarily by the ghost of his father, that needs to be taken into account.
1. You were the one that made the point that it is only the coach that matters.
2. Wellington was in charge when TC was hired. You can try to distribute as much credit away from the actual CEO to his son but there is a big hole there.
3. Why could John supposedly spearhead this great coaching choice as a #2 but as the #1 fail at the task miserably the next 3 times. Isn't it possible John not being in charge of that process created better results?
4. The only good coach picked as a #1 happened when he was publicly shamed and his co-owner had to push him to fire the last embarassment. And that good coach will likely be gone because John would rather overpay an marginal QB talent that he loves.
A man with this resume you want to claim was the force behind hiring our last good coach? Without evidence beyond a take down of an old man?
You posted the stat 22/32 for John Mara's tenure. That is factually closer to the worst than the best. Which just completely destroys your original point.
You are telling people they are cherry picking using 10 years of data as you try to use 12+ year old data.
You are so desperate to give John Mara all the credit for a hire when he was not in charge that you are acting like Wellington Mara, a real legend, couldn't find his way home.
You are like John when he criticized the rest of the offense to try to make DJ look better. Your love for John is blinding you from rational thought.
wellington was 88 years old battling cancer when they hired coughlin. he died 2 years before they hired jerry reese. you can create as many handles as you'd like and believe whatever you want.
You do realize that someone being interviewed by 2 people doesn't mean 1 of them is the decision maker right?
Also you are completely missing my point that John wasn't "the man" as long as Wellington was alive.
I'm not saying Wellington edged out John. I am saying that The longer John was in charge he clearly instituted some bad processes that clearly did not exist when he started.
You acting like John should get the credit as if he was running the show when he wasn't is one of many terrible points you've mad on this thread.
Nice try though!
And then have a President of Football, preferably someone with experience as a player or coach. And have the GM and head coach independently report that person.
The science of scouting is too complicated and demanding now for that discipline to ladder up to a coach. And if the coach is fired you can't risk losing that longer horizon focused group.
I view the GM as the personnel and budget department, whereas the coaching staff is the production department. I'd rather have the production group giving work direction.
And there be a layer of management above them both.
JM failed at recognizing the mistake of Reese that was exposed after just a few years. It was very clear well before 2015 JR had taken control.
Hard to attract highly accomplished HC's without giving them a lot of say in how the team is built and run. Harder to identify a HC without experience.
I will be shocked if Mara does not go for an accomplished HC next time.
That was all John Mara!
The science of scouting is too complicated and demanding now for that discipline to ladder up to a coach. And if the coach is fired you can't risk losing that longer horizon focused group.
In college football, everything reports up to the HC - coaching staff, recruiting/NIL, academics, NCAA advisor, etc. And that's with more players.
As someone who follows high school recruiting closely, it's also very, very difficult to project forward from high school to college.
I know there are differences between the sports, but I think the NFL could operate with a similar model. I'd role the GM under the HC in the NFL, like the Director of Recruiting rolls under the HC in college.
And then have a President of Football, preferably someone with experience as a player or coach. And have the GM and head coach independently report that person.
The science of scouting is too complicated and demanding now for that discipline to ladder up to a coach. And if the coach is fired you can't risk losing that longer horizon focused group.
I view the GM as the personnel and budget department, whereas the coaching staff is the production department. I'd rather have the production group giving work direction.
And there be a layer of management above them both.
an experienced head coach probably doesnt want to report into a head of football. they want to be the head of football. and inexperienced head coach will take any job, but once successful probably wont want that either.
the closest thing that exists to this is depo who is the chief strategy officer in cleveland and was supposedly the guy who pushed for stefanski, who was hired first ahead of the gm and became part of the search for the gm.
both stefanski and the gm report directly into haslem.
trigger alert for anyone who clicks to the link and listens to Depo explaining his role, he uses the word "identity" a lot.
Browns power structure: Revisiting the 2020 hiring process - ( New Window )
but stefanski was a great hire - he has won 2 coach of the years and his win% is .552. will he get over the hump despite the mess w/ watson or fizzle out like vrabel?
wellington was 88 years old battling cancer when they hired coughlin. he died 2 years before they hired jerry reese. you can create as many handles as you'd like and believe whatever you want.
Jerry Reese started with the Giants in 1994. He predates Coughlin by almost a decade.
Quote:
wellington was 88 years old battling cancer when they hired coughlin. he died 2 years before they hired jerry reese. you can create as many handles as you'd like and believe whatever you want.
Jerry Reese started with the Giants in 1994. He predates Coughlin by almost a decade.
if you followed the discussion i've clearly been referencing reese's promotion to GM, which was 2 years after wellington passed. not his initial hiring as a scout.
In comment 16556907 Eric on Li said:
Who cares about the last decade? This man was the driving force behind hiring one of the favorite coachesof his Dad and Boss. He discovered their Super Bowl winning GM. *After he was hired by his Dad and employed for a decade.
Are you sure we should stop at writing of his legend? I feel it would be more appropriate if you gathered a minstrel to sing songs of his heroism