HC/GM/Position Coach tracker
-
Joe Woods as DC. Just saw an ESPN alert.
Rather “on track” to be the DC when the 49ers season ends.
-
-
Joe Woods as DC. Just saw an ESPN alert.
Rather “on track” to be the DC when the 49ers season ends.
Joe Woods as DC. Just saw an ESPN alert.
Rather “on track” to be the DC when the 49ers season ends.
I would rather go with a clean slate with that than bring back Wilks, for sure.
Maybe the Packers will do us a favor today.
-
I read an article by Ian Rappaport on NFL.com that Mike McDaniel and Mike LaFleur are of interest to be the new OC's. However, in the article it says that the 49er's could block the move. I'm curious because I thought as long as it is not a lateral position a team can not block a hire? In this case LaFleur is the passing game coordinator and McDaniel the run game. Neither call plays. If it is a pay bump and title promotion, i was always under the impression it was good to go. In the same article, it talks how Woods would be allowed to go because he is in his last year of his contract. How does that work?
-
-
I read an article by Ian Rappaport on NFL.com that Mike McDaniel and Mike LaFleur are of interest to be the new OC's. However, in the article it says that the 49er's could block the move. I'm curious because I thought as long as it is not a lateral position a team can not block a hire? In this case LaFleur is the passing game coordinator and McDaniel the run game. Neither call plays. If it is a pay bump and title promotion, i was always under the impression it was good to go. In the same article, it talks how Woods would be allowed to go because he is in his last year of his contract. How does that work?
I read an article by Ian Rappaport on NFL.com that Mike McDaniel and Mike LaFleur are of interest to be the new OC's. However, in the article it says that the 49er's could block the move. I'm curious because I thought as long as it is not a lateral position a team can not block a hire? In this case LaFleur is the passing game coordinator and McDaniel the run game. Neither call plays. If it is a pay bump and title promotion, i was always under the impression it was good to go. In the same article, it talks how Woods would be allowed to go because he is in his last year of his contract. How does that work?
Someone mentioned recently that all assistant coaches are now considered equal, so unless an assistant is interviewing for a head coach job, it would be considered a lateral move for a WR coach to interview to be someone else's Offensive Coordinator.
-
Agree. The transition from coordinator to HC is so huge all by itself, and there's no need to make it exponentially harder.
Are you doubting The Process Part Deux?
-
Are you doubting The Process Part Deux?
I'm going full Costanza this time. I have always - and I do mean always, bought hook, line and eventually stinker into our newest GM and/or coaches with honest feelings of "this/these dude(s) will be the one(s) to finally make us winners, because.......... <insert whatever bullshit reasons concocted in my head/heart here>"
Not this time. Nope. I'm not saying I'm going to openly go all Soju/Debbie Downer on them, but rather that they are going to have to prove it to me by winning, and doing so consistently, before I slobber all over their junk.
It worked for George, it'll work for me too.
-
Are you doubting The Process Part Deux?
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
-
I read an article by Ian Rappaport on NFL.com that Mike McDaniel and Mike LaFleur are of interest to be the new OC's. However, in the article it says that the 49er's could block the move. I'm curious because I thought as long as it is not a lateral position a team can not block a hire? In this case LaFleur is the passing game coordinator and McDaniel the run game. Neither call plays. If it is a pay bump and title promotion, i was always under the impression it was good to go. In the same article, it talks how Woods would be allowed to go because he is in his last year of his contract. How does that work?
Someone mentioned recently that all assistant coaches are now considered equal, so unless an assistant is interviewing for a head coach job, it would be considered a lateral move for a WR coach to interview to be someone else's Offensive Coordinator.
Someone mentioned recently that all assistant coaches are now considered equal, so unless an assistant is interviewing for a head coach job, it would be considered a lateral move for a WR coach to interview to be someone else's Offensive Coordinator.
It’s only lateral if the OC isn’t calling plays which maybe the case here.
-
Are you doubting The Process Part Deux?
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
How does one ever know when The Process has their shit together?
So... how's the GM search going? Seems pretty quiet on The Process front. I assumed the Browns would put the full-court pressure on Berry, you know, to get the band back together, but....
-
I see us returning more to The Process than I do installing another Player-Super-Evaluator-in-Chief as GM.
...And that, of course reminds one of 'The Committee'. Where Shashi, who had to be told which player they were interested in looking at while at a pro day, had final say on draft picks / the roster. ( now we have, 'The Family' )
...And that, of course reminds one of 'The Committee'. Where Shashi, who had to be told which player they were interested in looking at while at a pro day, had final say on draft picks / the roster. ( now we have, 'The Family' )
Again... a misstatement of Sashi's role. In that regime there were either a consensus or there wasn't one.
The great thing about The Process - for those who have complete, unwavery support of it - is when it produces poor draft results there's absolutely no one to blame for them. Not his fault, not that guy's fault, definitely not that dude's fault.
As usual your take on any aspect of the former process is completely incorrect.
Somewhere in the Process there would be a scout, or scouts, who would be primarily responsible for the selection... or passing over... of a given player. This would be part of their "scorecard" and determine their future employment status. While the same could be true of the Analytics Dept., but more likely in that case would be tweaking the model.
The "GM" would in turn be judged on the improvement... or lack thereof... of the team.... same as Dorsey.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Are you doubting The Process Part Deux?
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
Two Blondes run out of Beer in a Cleveland blizzard. They both walk 1.5 miles to a open store. They both buy a 12 pack & head back to camp..How many beers will they have left after returning to camp? Nope... i have no use for Depo deciding if enough anna Or Lynics is being used in this all new kumba ya adventure....
UPDATE-- OL coach/Asst.HC James Campen won't be retained for next season..
Steve Wilks has been informed as of today, he won't be retained either/// per MKC**** 49'ers DB Coach JOE WOODS seems to be the Name of the Day replacement as new DC? ..
stay tuned
-
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
How does one ever know when The Process has their shit together?
So... how's the GM search going? Seems pretty quiet on The Process front. I assumed the Browns would put the full-court pressure on Berry, you know, to get the band back together, but....
How does one ever know when The Process has their shit together?
Same way you know in case of a traditional approach... W/L record trend.
-
What ever happened to Wade Phillips as DC?
Did The Process crunch some numbers and worry that the probability Wade would drop dead on the sideline was too high?
-
Lotta names floating around for a lot of positions...
Does seem odd that the rumors around hiring a WR Coach are stronger than those for an OC.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
I read an article by Ian Rappaport on NFL.com that Mike McDaniel and Mike LaFleur are of interest to be the new OC's. However, in the article it says that the 49er's could block the move. I'm curious because I thought as long as it is not a lateral position a team can not block a hire? In this case LaFleur is the passing game coordinator and McDaniel the run game. Neither call plays. If it is a pay bump and title promotion, i was always under the impression it was good to go. In the same article, it talks how Woods would be allowed to go because he is in his last year of his contract. How does that work?
Someone mentioned recently that all assistant coaches are now considered equal, so unless an assistant is interviewing for a head coach job, it would be considered a lateral move for a WR coach to interview to be someone else's Offensive Coordinator.
Someone mentioned recently that all assistant coaches are now considered equal, so unless an assistant is interviewing for a head coach job, it would be considered a lateral move for a WR coach to interview to be someone else's Offensive Coordinator.
If assistants coaches had a union, they would fight like hell to get rid of that rule. In fact, I think the operative term you use there is "Now"....because I think it is a fairly new policy. The purpose of which I am curious about. Did owners/GM just not want to lose good asst. coaches to promotions short of HC?
-
Are you doubting The Process Part Deux?
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
That’s quite the drum you keep pounding Dutch.
On the surface an analytically driven approach doesn’t seem so bad. Problem is it takes time to collect data, analyze it, share it amongst the shot callers, and ultimately make decisions.
And it feels like there’s a sense of urgency because we don’t even know who all the shot callers are yet. I read an article the other day that suggested the Browns may “punt” this next draft (like trade down, collect more picks) because they don’t have their shit together, which means even the draft (usually a fun time) will suck.
And of course, the jury is way way out on how much l trust the yet to be named list of shot callers. Or whether they will be given enough time to see their vision through with the fickle owner. It’s quite the bowl of bummer stew.
Punt because they don't have their shit together? Well, that sounds like what our analytics centric FO did for a few year. Is that SOP for that kind of crew?
What it means is that they can't get their shit for talent mostly (except for a no brainer like Garrett.) So, is that what we have to look forward to again? Defer, defer, defer? Well, maybe they will defer enough so that when the next change comes, someone who knows talent can be the beneficiary of their pusillanimity like Dorsey was.
-
And that, of course reminds one of 'The Committee'. Where Shashi, who had to be told which player they were interested in looking at while at a pro day, had final say on draft picks / the roster. ( now we have, 'The Family' )
Again... a misstatement of Sashi's role. In that regime there were either a consensus or there wasn't one.
Well, what was his role. To be the potted plant and do fuck all. That seems to have been it.
-
Lotta names floating around for a lot of positions...
Does seem odd that the rumors around hiring a WR Coach are stronger than those for an OC.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login