PDA

View Full Version : Does Carl have what it takes?


shaneo69
09-27-2004, 12:18 PM
BigChiefFan posted this on another thread and I thought it was very appropriate for the discussions going on today...

Five essential traits for an NFL general manager

By Nolan Nawrocki
Dec. 18, 2003


While head coaches may be most responsible for a team’s success, the role of a general manager is equally important. Regardless of how brilliant a head coach may be, without good talent, his chances will be greatly diminished.

The perfect example is in Cincinnati, which, for the last decade, has largely ignored the importance of a competent front office, putting the burden of talent evaluation on the coaching staff while owning the smallest scouting department in the NFL.

Last year, the Bengals signed longtime veteran personnel boss Bill Tobin as a consultant, which helped produce one of the franchise’s best drafts in years. As the de facto general manager, Marvin Lewis’ latest project is trying to convince notoriously frugal team president Mike Brown to retain Greg Seamore, the team’s advance scout, whose salary is being paid by the Cowboys because he lost his job as a Dallas assistant with a year left on his contract. The success Lewis has had, putting the Bengals in playoff contention for the first time in more than 10 years, can be partially attributed to building up the scouting department.

The make-up of a scouting department can be integral to a team’s success and at the heart of every department is a savvy general manager. Up to a fourth of the league, eight teams in all, could be looking for new GMs after the season, with the first one already being hired in Atlanta. The Falcons hired longtime Bucs GM Rich McKay, setting the wheels in motion for more moves to come, including a now vacant post in Tampa. With owners searching for competent talent evaluators, PFW surveyed NFL executives around the league to identify the essential qualities needed to be a GM.

Here are the top five qualities:

Proactive attitude
A trait that encompasses energy, work ethic and the ability to quickly solve problems, a general manager needs to have a can-do attitude and be ready to handle the many curveballs that come a team’s way. When multiple players are placed on injured reserve or cannot play for other reasons, a GM must be ready to take action immediately and be prepared to work early into the morning to find a solution. Not only must they have a solution, but one general manager said you must have Plan A, Plan B and Plan C prepared in the event the first two plans don’t work.

Former Packers GM Ron Wolf said a GM must be willing to arrive at 7 a.m. and stay until 8 p.m., essentially working 13-hour days, and seek employees that share the same diligent work ethic. It’s not a job for a guy who keeps an eye on the clock, eager to punch out. Great GMs never stop thinking about ways to improve their team.

Football knowledge
General managers don’t need to evaluate film every minute of the day like a low-level scout is paid to do, but they better have a keen eye for talent and understand the intricacies of the game. For example, some evaluators will argue that arm strength and being able to make all the throws is the most important characteristic for a quarterback. Others say accuracy — being able to deliver the football on the numbers to a receiver in stride — is far more important. At any given time, a general manager must be able to formulate his own opinion on a player instead of relying on his subordinates and must know what skills he is seeking, because at the end of the day, the success of a team’s draft picks and free-agent acquisitions ultimately determine its fate.

With the importance of finding talent, a GM must be able to run a draft and oversee college and pro scouting departments. Most often, a general manager’s knowledge traces back to one’s own playing and coaching experience, having an understanding of technique and traits most specific to a position. Some general managers, such as , have been criticized for exerting their influence too much, but the great GMs often have the respect of their coaching staff and players, because they have done it all before.

While Davis has developed a reputation for being difficult to work for, exceptional leadership sometimes means ticking people off. A sign of mediocrity is trying to please everyone. It is said Davis still watches more film than any person in the ’ organization, and his input, while any GM needs to be careful not to meddle too much, can be extremely valuable to the development of a head coach and his players. With the success coaches such as John Madden, Tom Flores, Mike Shanahan and Jon Gruden have had, it is difficult to argue that the way they were molded hasn’t been integral to their development.

Strong communicator
The downfall of many organizations and businesses alike is often attributed to a lack of communication. The skill is directly correlated with leadership. A strong leader keeps his people abreast of what’s happening and in what direction it is going, so it can achieve what it set out to accomplish.

In the NFL, more than other companies, Steelers Hall of Fame owner/president Dan Rooney says the ability to communicate is essential because “you are dealing with a lot of big egos” that need to be soothed, especially in the case of a head coach. “It is essential that a general manager have an open relationship with the head coach as well as other department heads,” Rooney said.

A general manager also must be able to serve as the frontman for the organization and be able to handle the media. Some of the most savvy GMs, like Bills GM Tom Donahoe, are known for fostering strong relationships with respected writers and being able to put a positive spin on any subject.

How genuine a GM is with his employees is another key component of communication. When it comes to nurturing a staff and letting go players, a compassionate GM can boost morale, which filters down to the players and even the lowest-level employees. Most players, while they may not always like what they hear, prefer a straight-shooter. The only way to get better is to be realistic with one’s assessment of oneself.

By understanding personalities and how to deal with employees on an individual basis and as a group, as Bill Parcells has been praised for doing, a GM can effectively handle egos and motivate his troops while also being able to serve as a peacemaker and foster a cooperative workplace.

Savvy negotiator with business acumen
To secure talent, a GM must often deal with well-versed agents looking out for the best interests of their clients. With the salary cap growing to almost $80 million next year, how a team manages its money needs to be of prime consideration. Understanding the intricacies of the salary cap, how to make concessions, compromise bargaining points and outmaneuver agents is paramount to a team’s bottom line. A great example of the importance of negotiating can be found in Jacksonville three years ago. NFL insiders attribute a big part of the Jaguars’ decline in recent years to the mishandling of the cap by former team president Michael Huyghue, who too often overpaid players, and forced the Jaguars to deplete the roster of much of their veteran talent to get back into decent cap shape.

Steelers President Dan Rooney also noted how a GM must serve as a business CEO and see the big picture.

“Everybody in the organization, especially someone in a responsible position, should be concerned with the attendance, that fan interest is good and that you treat the fans properly,” he said.

The empty seats and disgruntled cheers in fickle New York no doubt played a huge role in the dismissal of Jim Fassel. At its core, an NFL team is a revenue-seeking franchise like any other company and cannot ignore its loyal consumers.

Vision
Perhaps the most important contribution of any general manager is having a plan and being given the flexibility by ownership to enact it. The plan must include a core of principles, going from how to efficiently manage the cap and which type of players to re-sign to what kind of strength and conditioning program to implement and how players will rehabilitate.

As Cincinnati’s de facto general manager, Marvin Lewis has been praised for completely overhauling the Bengals’ organization, going so far as to repaint the walls in the weight room and supply fruit and drinks for the players, in an effort to increase offseason participation at the facility, which may have been the worst in the league when he arrived.

Having a vision, making choices that move a team most swiftly toward its goals and going after them with determination and single-mindedness can take a team a long way. Two examples can be found at the top of AFC division-leading teams. One of the most respected executives in the league, Colts president Bill Polian, is known for his perfectionism, keeping his finger on every component of the organization. While some people have criticized him for being a micromanager, his thoroughness filters down to each member of his staff and sets an example for how work should be done. Patriots vice president of player personnel Scott Pioli has developed a reputation for his burning competitive desire, being known to hole himself up in the office to get his work done and solve a roster shortage, which he has had to do often this year with the number of injuries the team has endured.

Both examples illustrate passion, which arguably may be the single-most important characteristic any GM must have. But a GM better know himself as well as he knows talent and be able to surround himself with a competent staff.

“Today, football is a lot different than it used to be,” former Packers GM Ron Wolf said. “It’s a three-pronged affair now with the salary cap, the coaching and the personnel and they all better work together in that area. So whatever your weakness is as a general manager, you better have strong people in those other areas.”


I find it a little surprising that Carl wasn't mentioned in this article, considering he has been GM for the same team for 16 years now.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 12:20 PM
Carl is great a putting people in the seats, but building the team from the ground up, he has failed miserably.

HC_Chief
09-27-2004, 12:23 PM
CP's titles constitute a conflict of interest IMO. As CEO and President, his goal is profitability... the 'bottom line'. In that regard, he has been incredibly successful. Before CP, the Chiefs were losing money. They've since become one of the most profitible franchises in the league (they have also increased ticket, parking and concession costs to near the top of the league).

As a GM, he has been shit. Predominantly poor draft picks, countless holdouts and being generally despised by the fan base are not what you want in your GM.

It's pretty obvious to me which title(s) he considers most important.

Brock
09-27-2004, 12:24 PM
Carl is a strong communicator. And the message is "Fans, eat shit and like it".

ChiTown
09-27-2004, 12:26 PM
Carl is a strong communicator. And the message is "Fans, eat shit and like it".

ROFL , Classic! rep

cdcox
09-27-2004, 12:28 PM
Proactive attitude - D Carl's biggest weakness. He tends to react, rather than anticipate.

Football knowledge - B- Better with non-skill than skill positions. Does better with free agents than draft picks. Much better than average at selecting quality coaches.

Strong communicator - B

Savvy negotiator with business acumen - B Has had some hold outs, but I think he does a good job keeping us under the cap.

Vision - C Definitely has "his" vision, and manages to have it carried through the organization, but it has become apparent that it is not the "right" vision to win a championship.

Garcia Bronco
09-27-2004, 12:30 PM
I think the answer to this question is obvious....of course he can handle it...he's done a great job thus far.

Garcia Bronco
09-27-2004, 12:32 PM
:)

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 12:32 PM
Proactive attitude - D Carl's biggest weakness. He tends to react, rather than anticipate.

Football knowledge - B- Better with non-skill than skill positions. Does better with free agents than draft picks. Much better than average at selecting quality coaches.

Strong communicator - B

Savvy negotiator with business acumen - B Has had some hold outs, but I think he does a good job keeping us under the cap.

Vision - C Definitely has "his" vision, and manages to have it carried through the organization, but it has become apparent that it is not the "right" vision to win a championship.
Geez, are you grading on a curve? Carl's talent evaluation is putrid.

cdcox
09-27-2004, 12:34 PM
Geez, are you grading on a curve? Carl's talent evaluation is putrid.

You don't field teams that have done so well in the regular season over a prolonged period of time with putrid talent. I was trying to be objective.

Sig Kauffman
09-27-2004, 12:37 PM
I think the answer to this question is obvious....of course he can handle it...he's done a great job thus far.

of course a Denver fan's going to say that. Without Carl, you might not have won back-to-back Super Bowls.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 12:40 PM
You don't field teams that have done so well in the regular season over a prolonged period of time with putrid talent. I was trying to be objective.
I could give two shits about the regular season-I want to win the Super Bowl. That is the goal, right or are you content with just the regular season? Carl's draft record speaks for itself and how many playoff wins have we had in the last decade? I still love the Chiefs, but I'm not drinking down the kool-aid.

Gaz
09-27-2004, 12:44 PM
Carl has the only thing it takes:

A stranglehold on the job.

All the “Carl must go” noise is just impotent fan venting. However, I totally understand the medicinal benefits of venting. It makes us feel better, despite the fact that it has no effect whatsoever on bad old Carl.

Carry on.

xoxo~
Gaz
As impotent as the next BB expert.

KCTitus
09-27-2004, 12:51 PM
Carl has the only thing it takes: A stranglehold on the job.

Yep...

Is stating the patently obvious a 'homer' take? Carl's here through next year at the least.

shaneo69
09-27-2004, 12:52 PM
Carl is great a putting people in the seats, but building the team from the ground up, he has failed miserably.

We currently have two starters out of eleven on offense that were drafted by Carl----TWO!!! That's pathetic.

Our QB's have always come from FA or through trades. Drafted Elkins and Blundin in the 2nd round and both were busts.

Our starting RB's have been drafted by previous Chiefs regimes (Okoye), or have come through FA (Word, Marcus, Kimble, T-Rich, Priest), trades (Bong Morris), or have been bad draft picks (Hill, Bennett, Shehee, Cloud, Moreau, and Blaylock, plus LJ?).

Our starting WR's have been leftovers from previous Chiefs regimes (Paige, E. Harry), or have come through FA (Mandley, Birden, Davis, Perriman, Rison, Alexander, Morton, Kennison) or have been bad draft picks (Robb Thomas, Lake Dawson, Chris Penn, Kevin Lockett, Tamarick Vanover, Sylvester Morris, Larry Parker, and Snoop Minnis, plus Samie Parker & Jeris McIntyre?). We also wasted a 2nd round pick on Victor Bailey one year. And the only decent WR that Carl has drafted, he let walk as a FA (Joe Horn).

To be unable to draft one all-pro skill position player (QB, RB, WR) in 16 years is inexcusable.

Otter
09-27-2004, 12:55 PM
As impotent as the next BB expert.


Speak for yourselves. :harumph:

cdcox
09-27-2004, 12:55 PM
I could give two shits about the regular season-I want to win the Super Bowl. That is the goal, right or are you content with just the regular season? Carl's draft record speaks for itself and how many playoff wins have we had in the last decade? I still love the Chiefs, but I'm not drinking down the kool-aid.

Yes a Super Bowl is the only goal that matters. But you said his talent evaluation is putrid. If so, our talent over the last 16 years must have been putrid. By any fair evaluation, you cannot say that the talent on the Chiefs has been putrid during Carl's tenure. His talent evaluation is not top drawer and he does have many additional faults.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 12:56 PM
We currently have two starters out of eleven on offense that were drafted by Carl----TWO!!! That's pathetic.

Our QB's have always come from FA or through trades. Drafted Elkins and Blundin in the 2nd round and both were busts.

Our starting RB's have been drafted by previous Chiefs regimes (Okoye), or have come through FA (Word, Marcus, Kimble, T-Rich, Priest), trades (Bong Morris), or have been bad draft picks (Hill, Bennett, Shehee, Cloud, Moreau, and Blaylock, plus LJ?).

Our starting WR's have been leftovers from previous Chiefs regimes (Paige, E. Harry), or have come through FA (Mandley, Birden, Davis, Perriman, Rison, Alexander, Morton, Kennison) or have been bad draft picks (Robb Thomas, Lake Dawson, Chris Penn, Kevin Lockett, Tamarick Vanover, Sylvester Morris, Larry Parker, and Snoop Minnis, plus Samie Parker & Jeris McIntyre?). We also wasted a 2nd round pick on Victor Bailey one year. And the only decent WR that Carl has drafted, he let walk as a FA (Joe Horn).

To be unable to draft one all-pro skill position player (QB, RB, WR) in 16 years is inexcusable.
Great post. I agree whole-heartedly.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 12:59 PM
Yes a Super Bowl is the only goal that matters. But you said his talent evaluation is putrid. If so, our talent over the last 16 years must have been putrid. By any fair evaluation, you cannot say that the talent on the Chiefs has been putrid during Carl's tenure. His talent evaluation is not top drawer and he does have many additional faults.Read post #15 on a little insight to how I feel as well when I made that comment. The putrid comment may have been a little over-the-top, but just like Shane-O clearly posted, I wasn't far off in my evaluation of King Karl. Like I said his draft hsitory speaks for itself and shane-o proved it.

cdcox
09-27-2004, 01:02 PM
Read post #15 on a little insight to how I feel as well when I made that comment. The putrid comment may have been a little over-the-top, but just like Shane-O clearly posted, I wasn't far off in my evaluation of King Karl. Like I said his draft hsitory speaks for itself and shane-o proved it.

And in my original post, I indicated that I considered free agents and coaching personnel in my grade of talent evaluation. I agree that he has sucked at evaluating skill positions coming out of college. No question about that. But he has drafted a number of good players at non-skill positions.

shaneo69
09-27-2004, 01:20 PM
But he has drafted a number of good players at non-skill positions.

I don't know about that either. By my count, since the '93 draft (which covers the last 12 drafts), only one defensive draftee has made the Pro Bowl as a Chief (Jerome Woods), and he's only made it to one Pro Bowl. That's almost shockingly inept.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 01:39 PM
And in my original post, I indicated that I considered free agents and coaching personnel in my grade of talent evaluation. I agree that he has sucked at evaluating skill positions coming out of college. No question about that. But he has drafted a number of good players at non-skill positions.
So what exactly is your issue with my take then, That I said he was putrid at evaluating talent? Prove me wrong. I can name true impact players on one hand. Five or less in 16 years IS putrid.

KC Jones
09-27-2004, 02:20 PM
Correction:

only 3 starters on offense are our draft picks:
Shields
Gonzalez
Richardson

As for Carl, he was brought in to build support for a failing franchise and make the team respectable again. He did that, but it's a different world today than it was in the NFL 14 years ago. It's no longer necessary to dream up ways to get the public interested in the NFL.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 02:26 PM
Correction:

only 3 starters on offense are our draft picks:
Shields
Gonzalez
Richardson

As for Carl, he was brought in to build support for a failing franchise and make the team respectable again. He did that, but it's a different world today than it was in the NFL 14 years ago. It's no longer necessary to dream up ways to get the public interested in the NFL.
Richardson isn't a Chief draft pick. He was on the Cowboys practice squad before we got him.

BigRedChief
09-27-2004, 02:54 PM
Carl has the only thing it takes:

A stranglehold on the job.

All the “Carl must go” noise is just impotent fan venting. However, I totally understand the medicinal benefits of venting. It makes us feel better, despite the fact that it has no effect whatsoever on bad old Carl.

Carry on.

xoxo~
Gaz
As impotent as the next BB expert.


As the head of the impotent Chief fan clan I resent your remarks. We are not impotent..We prefer the term frail loyalist...:p

I know nothing will be done no matter how loud we scream. I saw Lamar on Red Friday he's too feeble to make a move. The only way we get out of this is for King Carl to leave voluntarily. :thumb:

cdcox
09-27-2004, 04:04 PM
So what exactly is your issue with my take then, That I said he was putrid at evaluating talent? Prove me wrong. I can name true impact players on one hand. Five or less in 16 years IS putrid.

Talent evaluation goes beyond the draft. It certainly includes free agents and coaching personnel.


How many teams have drafted 3 or more likely HOFs (Thomas, Shields, and Gonzo) in the last 16 years? Name them. If is not greater than 20, I think putrid is far too strong of a word even to evaluate his drafts.

Tribal Warfare
09-27-2004, 04:51 PM
King Carl should leave 5 year plan is in year 16, and in that span only one playoff win. KC isn't in mediocrity any more also, it's a state of total collapse. Any argruement that refutes that Peterson shouldn't go is either short sighted or has a bad memory.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 08:33 PM
King Carl should leave 5 year plan is in year 16, and in that span only one playoff win. KC isn't in mediocrity any more also, it's a state of total collapse. Any argruement that refutes that Peterson shouldn't go is either short sighted or has a bad memory.
Brazen post, but I like it. Nice take.

Inspector
09-27-2004, 08:49 PM
According to Jettio, if you can't see that Carl has been a complete failure, then you are a blithering idiot....or something like that.






Or, maybe he was talking about Bush.

BigChiefFan
09-27-2004, 08:49 PM
Talent evaluation goes beyond the draft. It certainly includes free agents and coaching personnel.


How many teams have drafted 3 or more likely HOFs (Thomas, Shields, and Gonzo) in the last 16 years? Name them. If is not greater than 20, I think putrid is far too strong of a word even to evaluate his drafts. Let's go back to our original thoughts that in which I asked if you were grading on a curve before it turned into this. That's fine, I just believe we have gone way off coarse here. I definitely agree with you that evaluating talent goes beyond the draft. That's a given, anybody that knows just a little bit about football knows that, but what can't be disputed is the FOUNDATION of any good team is built through the DRAFT.

Carl's track record speaks for itself. In fact he has more than the average GM's lifespan for one team has had to more than fairly access his performance to date. Just like Shane-O pointed out Carl hasn't had much luck at all in his 16 year career in getting the team over the hump. IN FACT, the Chiefs haven't even won a playoff game in over a decade. Over a decade that's a LONG time. Pretty convincing argument for his track record if you ask me. Shane-O brought up some very valid points about the skill positions and Carl's lack of success with those picks. It's well-documented.

I don't want to turn this into a me against you, but if you are basing your whole argument on a word:putrid then I don't know what to tell you other than I think that's trivial. I just I really believe Carl hasn't provided the team with enough firepower to win a Super Bowl in 16 years. Just my take.

KHinz57
09-27-2004, 08:49 PM
We currently have two starters out of eleven on offense that were drafted by Carl----TWO!!! That's pathetic.

Our QB's have always come from FA or through trades. Drafted Elkins and Blundin in the 2nd round and both were busts.

Our starting RB's have been drafted by previous Chiefs regimes (Okoye), or have come through FA (Word, Marcus, Kimble, T-Rich, Priest), trades (Bong Morris), or have been bad draft picks (Hill, Bennett, Shehee, Cloud, Moreau, and Blaylock, plus LJ?).

Our starting WR's have been leftovers from previous Chiefs regimes (Paige, E. Harry), or have come through FA (Mandley, Birden, Davis, Perriman, Rison, Alexander, Morton, Kennison) or have been bad draft picks (Robb Thomas, Lake Dawson, Chris Penn, Kevin Lockett, Tamarick Vanover, Sylvester Morris, Larry Parker, and Snoop Minnis, plus Samie Parker & Jeris McIntyre?). We also wasted a 2nd round pick on Victor Bailey one year. And the only decent WR that Carl has drafted, he let walk as a FA (Joe Horn).

To be unable to draft one all-pro skill position player (QB, RB, WR) in 16 years is inexcusable.

Just imagine if we still had Joe Horn for the past 3 years? :banghead:

Deberg_1990
09-27-2004, 08:56 PM
We currently have two starters out of eleven on offense that were drafted by Carl----TWO!!! That's pathetic.

Our QB's have always come from FA or through trades. Drafted Elkins and Blundin in the 2nd round and both were busts.

Our starting RB's have been drafted by previous Chiefs regimes (Okoye), or have come through FA (Word, Marcus, Kimble, T-Rich, Priest), trades (Bong Morris), or have been bad draft picks (Hill, Bennett, Shehee, Cloud, Moreau, and Blaylock, plus LJ?).

Our starting WR's have been leftovers from previous Chiefs regimes (Paige, E. Harry), or have come through FA (Mandley, Birden, Davis, Perriman, Rison, Alexander, Morton, Kennison) or have been bad draft picks (Robb Thomas, Lake Dawson, Chris Penn, Kevin Lockett, Tamarick Vanover, Sylvester Morris, Larry Parker, and Snoop Minnis, plus Samie Parker & Jeris McIntyre?). We also wasted a 2nd round pick on Victor Bailey one year. And the only decent WR that Carl has drafted, he let walk as a FA (Joe Horn).

To be unable to draft one all-pro skill position player (QB, RB, WR) in 16 years is inexcusable.

Great points! I counldnt have said it better myself...Ive been one of Carls biggest supporters around here for awhile now...but even i must admit its probably time for him to go. I admire and give him all the credit in the world for turning this hapless franchise around back in the late 80's and early 90's. But haveing said that, its said that in 16 years he hasnt "drafted" a franchise QB, WR or RB? thats inexcusable!

cdcox
09-27-2004, 09:01 PM
Let's go back to our original thoughts that in which I asked if you were grading on a curve before it turned into this. That's fine, I just believe we have gone way off coarse here. I definitely agree with you that evaluating talent goes beyond the draft. That's a given, anybody that knows just a little bit about football knows that, but what can't be disputed is the FOUNDATION of any good team is built through the DRAFT.

Carl's track record speaks for itself. In fact he has more than the average GM's lifespan for one team has had to more than fairly access his performance to date. Just like Shane-O pointed out Carl hasn't had much luck at all in his 16 year career in getting the team over the hump. IN FACT, the Chiefs haven't even won a playoff game in over a decade. Over a decade that's a LONG time. Pretty convincing argument for his track record if you ask me. Shane-O brought up some very valid points about the skill positions and Carl's lack of success with those picks. It's well-documented.

I don't want to turn this into a me against you, but if you are basing your whole argument on a word:putrid then I don't know what to tell you other than I think that's trivial. I just I really believe Carl hasn't provided the team with enough firepower to win a Super Bowl in 16 years. Just my take.


I agree that Carl has failed to get the team over the hump. The lack of playoff wins speaks for itself. I would not be sad to see him go. But don't think the talent we have had is particularly poor, hence I do not think his ability at talent evaluation, taken as whole, is partiuclarly bad. Not stellar, but not bad. Like I say a B- for talent evaluation. Overall I would give his tenure at GM a C, because of his failure in the playoffs. But I think that is more tied to his failure to be proactive (addressing problems before the become critical), which I gave him a grade of D, than it is talent evaluation.

Deberg_1990
09-27-2004, 09:03 PM
Great points! I counldnt have said it better myself...Ive been one of Carls biggest supporters around here for awhile now...but even i must admit its probably time for him to go. I admire and give him all the credit in the world for turning this hapless franchise around back in the late 80's and early 90's. But haveing said that, its said that in 16 years he hasnt "drafted" a franchise QB, WR or RB? thats inexcusable!

oh and one more thing to add to the Anti-Carl bandwagon....He chose Grbac over Gannon....a Future 2 time MVP sat on the bench behind Steve Bono and Elvis Grbac! its laughable now....

cdcox
09-27-2004, 09:08 PM
oh and one more thing to add to the Anti-Carl bandwagon....He chose Grbac over Gannon....a Future 2 time MVP sat on the bench behind Steve Bono and Elvis Grbac! its laughable now....

If you think Gannon would have been MVP on our team, with our receivers, with our schemes ROFL ROFL ROFL

Gannon and Grbac were almost identical in our system with our recivers. There is very little difference in their statistics. Both of them proved to fold like a cheap tent under pressure. I'm glad they are both gone.

Deberg_1990
09-27-2004, 09:20 PM
If you think Gannon would have been MVP on our team, with our receivers, with our schemes ROFL ROFL ROFL

Gannon and Grbac were almost identical in our system with our recivers. There is very little difference in their statistics. Both of them proved to fold like a cheap tent under pressure. I'm glad they are both gone.


your right..he probably would have never reached the heights here that he did in Oakland had he stayed. Although, we did have some average teams 99 and 2000. and Derrick Alexander, while lazy at times was a gamebreaker when he wanted to be.....so we might have one 1 or 2 more games a year in those seasons with Gannon at the helm....would have put us in the playoffs at least..