They asked him about the banner.
Posted via Mobile Device

Oh wow they mentioned the banner

He's learned that when there's success, you're never as smart as they say. When you're a failure, you're not as bad as they say. That's what he's learned. He acknowledges hearing the criticism.

He tries to make a point of criticizing the performance, not the performer.

Says that criticism that is personal and affects his family is tough.
Posted via Mobile Device

He's not angry about the criticism. Doesn't want to wallow.

He thinks there has been progress in the organization on every level, but even though it's in a better place, it's not good enough.
Posted via Mobile Device

He thinks it's his fault that fans don't know him personally. He's a private person and doesn't try to sell himself. He doesn't like the spotlight. One thing he had learned is that he needs to let people are who he is.
Posted via Mobile Device

That, my friend, sounds like Clark speaking.

"Scott, let them get to know you."

FAX

Pioli's the general manager though, not Cassel's uncle.
Even if he believed he was the guy he should've handled it dispassionately and waited until he saw the production necessary to warrant such a deal.

I have no issue with the fact that he believed in Cassel.
My issue is with his prematurely extending him that contract.
There's no reason why he couldn't have allowed him to play for a year under the tag.

I have a feeling we're talking past each other, Mr. Micjones.

FAX

I think we're both in the 300 level of the stadium, in different sections.
Errors in judgment concerning personnel aren't necessarily a big deal to me.
EVERY GM has them. It's when you couple those errors with 8-figure deals that it becomes problematic.

Had he only been wrong about Cassel under a one-year deal, it would've been nothing to write home about.

Well, perhaps this is where we differ; Errors in evaluating draft picks or FAs with which you are unfamiliar is one thing. Bringing in a guy whom you've watched for years is something entirely different.

That, I believe, is the troubling aspect of the decision to hand him that contract ... above and beyond the fact that is basically pre-paid 6 years of total failure.

FAX

I honestly think it's easier to misjudge a player you're familiar with.
It's much more likely that you'll make an emotional decision about him.
And even when your evaluation is mostly objective, sometimes you can still just be wrong about a guy.

Right now it looks like alot of people are wrong about Jon Baldwin.
The kid seems to have all the talent in the world, but it's not translating to the field.
It may in time, but right now his biggest supporters are probably scratching their heads.

Interesting concept ...

You're paying a man 5 million a year ... with the expectation that that kind of money will be spent on selecting players with whom you are somehow "emotionally attached"? Regardless of their ability? And allows you to make decisions without objectivity? Ouch.

I submit that, if he was blinded by his "affection" for Cassel, it makes the decision all the worse. Far, far worse. Unforgivable, actually (and I am a very forgiving person, by the way).

That argument has backfireability in spades.

FAX

It's never scientific though Mr. Fax.
Coaches swoon over players routinely. Players who never quite perform in a way that justifies such an endorsement. GM's are no different.

I think he genuinely believes that Cassel has the potential to be "the guy".
He was invested in the guy though and let his attachment to him inform his business. That's always a mistake. A wiser GM would've let Cassel play through the season under the tag.

I get it......Len Dawson brought us the only Superbowl trophy that we have.....but why the **** do people want Clark to talk to Lenny about what to do? JFC.

I grant you all of that. And well said.

I would simply add that, his "genuine belief" in Cassel was sufficiently flawed and so grossly mistaken as to allow for (demand, even) legitimate questioning of Pioli's basic evaluation abilities.

Regardless of how his opinion might have been colored by emotion or affection or history or relationship, he is paid to "get it right" and be objective in his player assessments.

I have, obviously, believed from the outset that Cassel's contract terms were nothing less than absurd and my prior posts will prove that out. It made far more sense to give him a short-term deal and go from there. But the issues are really separate. Cassel's contract terms don't negate the fact that Pioli should have been able to better anticipate the ability and ultimate potential of his quarterback of choice ... especially given his prior, intimate experience with the player.

FAX