mattresell
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Messages
- 424
- Reaction score
- 0
This is something I wrote on my blog and transferred here. It's lengthy and not entirely about the Pack but it does include some of Sherman and definatly relates to him. I won't blame you if you pass it up and go to something shorter. I just wasnted to put it here for anyone who is interested.
As I look through sports, I see so much underqualification and ignorance amongst the people in charge. This is one of the underlying themes of Michael Lewis' book Moneyball and it's apparent everywhere you look. How do some of these decision makers (coaches, GMs, VPs) continue to make poor decisions time after time and still hold their jobs. In no other business would this ever occur. Do you think an invetment banker that loses money for his clients last very long at his firm? Even fast food employees that continually screw up orders eventually get fired. So in an industry as profitable as professional sports, how do these guys keep getting a free pass?
Maybe I'm just your typical blogger who thinks he can run his favorite team better than whoever is currently doing. That's partly true. I have no misconceptions about the fact that Terry Ryan is more qualified to run the Twins than I am. On the other hand, I feel that given the scouting time I could possibly draft better than Mike Sherman. At the very least, I know there is somebody else in the NFL coaching ranks that could do it better than him.
It's pretty clear that Mike Sherman, Mike Tice, Mike Martz, and a few other coaches are simply in over their heads. We shouldn't blame them, it's not their fault. They just shouldn't have been trusted with the job in the first place. That's where you have to point the finger at management and ask why they were hired in the first place. Again, how does somebody go from a positional coach to head coach in one step? Andy Reid is the only person to make that transition successfully. I truly believe that being a positional coach doesn't provide enough responsibility or experience to merit a direct promotion to running the entire team. Why weren't these guys tested as offensive coordinators first? That seems to be the standard that has worked fairly well for years. And it's not used just in sports. When is the last time a politician has made the jump from representative to president? I doubt it's ever happened. There's a certain chain of command one must move upward in in order to gain the necessary qualifications. Somehow this is over looked in sports, and it's nothing less than bad business practice. If any corporation were to run its operation the way many pro teams do, they'd be bankrupt in a couple years.
Remember when there was a big debate in the NFL over who was going to be better, Peyton Manning or Ryan Leaf? It's pretty clear what the answer is now. How were these teams unable to see the difference between the two. It seems to me that if I were making that large of an investment in a player I'd be damned sure I was making the right decision. I know you can't test for everything, but there must be someway to gauge a person's mental makeup. I refuse to believe that Mr. Leaf's immaturity and poor mental makeup couldn't be evaluated. I just think the teams' don't put enough effort into the process. And that has made the draft almost a crapshoot. There has to be more of a science to the whole process. But teams continue to look at their typical scouting measures like height and arm strength. Who really cares if a guy(Kyle Boller) can throw a football 60 yards from his knees? If he can't read a defense or throw it accurately, none of that matters. But even with all the 1st round busts, they refuse to alter their strategy. Aren't these physical tools that are evaluated the reason why Cadillac Williams was drafted after his backup Ronnie Brown. I know it's too early in their careers to judge them, but so far it looks as though there was a reason Brown played behind Cadillac.
Maybe Michael Lewis was right. Maybe pro sports is just some big rich guy club that values loyalty to the club over competance. That would explain how managers with losing records find jobs year after year. It would also explain why I have to listen to Steve Phillips' player analysis every night on ESPN. This guy proved to be a poor judge of talent while he was running the Mets. He constantly overpaid for mediocre players and now he's going to tell us(the "unknowledgable" sports fan) why Scott Podsednik is so great. Or why Adam Dunn is overrated because of his low BA and high strikeout total. It just doesn't amke any sense to me. Can we not find a former successful GM to give us our baseball analysis? That would seem to make more sense.
I guess it doesn't matter what I think though. I've got friends in low places. So as the baseball offseason approaches, we will see just as many ridiculously over priced contracts being signed as we have in the past. I just pray that eventually these organizations realize they are wasting money.
As I look through sports, I see so much underqualification and ignorance amongst the people in charge. This is one of the underlying themes of Michael Lewis' book Moneyball and it's apparent everywhere you look. How do some of these decision makers (coaches, GMs, VPs) continue to make poor decisions time after time and still hold their jobs. In no other business would this ever occur. Do you think an invetment banker that loses money for his clients last very long at his firm? Even fast food employees that continually screw up orders eventually get fired. So in an industry as profitable as professional sports, how do these guys keep getting a free pass?
Maybe I'm just your typical blogger who thinks he can run his favorite team better than whoever is currently doing. That's partly true. I have no misconceptions about the fact that Terry Ryan is more qualified to run the Twins than I am. On the other hand, I feel that given the scouting time I could possibly draft better than Mike Sherman. At the very least, I know there is somebody else in the NFL coaching ranks that could do it better than him.
It's pretty clear that Mike Sherman, Mike Tice, Mike Martz, and a few other coaches are simply in over their heads. We shouldn't blame them, it's not their fault. They just shouldn't have been trusted with the job in the first place. That's where you have to point the finger at management and ask why they were hired in the first place. Again, how does somebody go from a positional coach to head coach in one step? Andy Reid is the only person to make that transition successfully. I truly believe that being a positional coach doesn't provide enough responsibility or experience to merit a direct promotion to running the entire team. Why weren't these guys tested as offensive coordinators first? That seems to be the standard that has worked fairly well for years. And it's not used just in sports. When is the last time a politician has made the jump from representative to president? I doubt it's ever happened. There's a certain chain of command one must move upward in in order to gain the necessary qualifications. Somehow this is over looked in sports, and it's nothing less than bad business practice. If any corporation were to run its operation the way many pro teams do, they'd be bankrupt in a couple years.
Remember when there was a big debate in the NFL over who was going to be better, Peyton Manning or Ryan Leaf? It's pretty clear what the answer is now. How were these teams unable to see the difference between the two. It seems to me that if I were making that large of an investment in a player I'd be damned sure I was making the right decision. I know you can't test for everything, but there must be someway to gauge a person's mental makeup. I refuse to believe that Mr. Leaf's immaturity and poor mental makeup couldn't be evaluated. I just think the teams' don't put enough effort into the process. And that has made the draft almost a crapshoot. There has to be more of a science to the whole process. But teams continue to look at their typical scouting measures like height and arm strength. Who really cares if a guy(Kyle Boller) can throw a football 60 yards from his knees? If he can't read a defense or throw it accurately, none of that matters. But even with all the 1st round busts, they refuse to alter their strategy. Aren't these physical tools that are evaluated the reason why Cadillac Williams was drafted after his backup Ronnie Brown. I know it's too early in their careers to judge them, but so far it looks as though there was a reason Brown played behind Cadillac.
Maybe Michael Lewis was right. Maybe pro sports is just some big rich guy club that values loyalty to the club over competance. That would explain how managers with losing records find jobs year after year. It would also explain why I have to listen to Steve Phillips' player analysis every night on ESPN. This guy proved to be a poor judge of talent while he was running the Mets. He constantly overpaid for mediocre players and now he's going to tell us(the "unknowledgable" sports fan) why Scott Podsednik is so great. Or why Adam Dunn is overrated because of his low BA and high strikeout total. It just doesn't amke any sense to me. Can we not find a former successful GM to give us our baseball analysis? That would seem to make more sense.
I guess it doesn't matter what I think though. I've got friends in low places. So as the baseball offseason approaches, we will see just as many ridiculously over priced contracts being signed as we have in the past. I just pray that eventually these organizations realize they are wasting money.
