ndirish1978

I'd prefer we take a QB if this class proves to be as strong as expected. QB fortunes can change quickly. Remember, Matt Barkley would likely have been considered a top pick if he had come out a year earlier. Playing that extra year cost him millions and exposed him.

This act is tired

This is a message board. You're not getting paid for starting these duplicate threads that contain info that has already been discussed on this board ad nauseum.

Pardon me, but this whole "puppet" label is BS. Beane will be responsible for his specific set of duties, setting up an organizational structure and will work in concert with McDermott to get him what he needs on the personnel side. This archaic notion that there is only one "real" hierarchy and all coaches should work beneath and for a GM is outdated and ridiculous. I'm super tired of people positing this notion that there will be some hypothetical moment in which there are two players on the board in the draft - the coach and GM are somehow arguing over who to pick and gee whiz, if the GM isn't the one with final say to end that argument he's a puppet. If there are two players on the board, you follow your board. If you aren't organized enough to have considered the value you place on need/position when considering two players, then you have failed in setting up your draft board. This hypothetical situation is premised on the notion that there is a flawed system in place. If your system is flawed you have a much bigger problem than who gets "final say." We're not talking about some junta or cabal of a group of people making a decision, you're talking about TWO people at the very top of your organization making decisions. If those two people can't agree on a decision, your organization is screwed anyway.

Exactly. I would rather have a GM and HC who agree on a vision for moving forward rather than a GM who does what he wants and a HC who yells for the GM to "fire him" in front of everyone at training camp. At the very least we are going all-in with someone's vision. That vision will be executed. Whether or not the vision is worth anything will be apparent in the next couple of years. I find it VERY difficult to criticize this hiring unless you just want to complain about inexperience. It's pretty clear this was in the works from the moment McD was hired.

Jeff and Co - You have now firmly hijacked this thread, as QB evaluations have nothing to do with Beane's interview. Please take this discussion to the shoutbox or another thread, I came here looking for updates and got 3 pages or unrelated arguments.

Exactly

Kizer is not a project, he needed another year to develop. I would have preferred he stay at ND one more year, but he didn't. He is capable of starting in 2018.

I just go with Coach Mac or McG

I don't get why you'd hire this guy, he is thoroughly unlikeable and has a history of bring awful to fans.

I love this image, which was posted in the comments of that video

I believe the point of the article was to say that stars can be developed, not signed as splash signings to bolsters ticket sales.

That's a good question. My guess would be that it depends on the personalities of the people you have in place. It's entirely plausible that Whaley resented the fact that he was put in a horizontal position to the HC on the organization flow chart and tried to find ways to set himself over our HCs or vice versa. It's also entirely possible that ALL organizations have certain friction internally, but they actually keep it internal rather than fighting for control of the franchise like it's the Iron Throne.

Have you actually watched Poyer play? I doubt it

Sleeper post, underrated gem.

Successful people are confident and often arrogant. I'm not sure where humility comes in to play here.

Come on. I'd take Brady over every other player ever selected not named Montana, no brainer.

You need a strong leader in the organization. Whaley was not a leader, he was a competent scout. Even if the new organizational philosophy is poor I think you're going to see an end to the dysfunction at OBD. McDermott is clearly an actual leader of men and people will have to either get behind him or get canned.

LOL, I've yet to see a single post by you on this board that would lead me to get behind that suggestion

We had the top pick in the draft all sewn up and then decided to win week 17 to "get the guys in a winning mentality." The Jets now have the first pick, we are now 3rd based on tiebreakers with the 49ers and both teams have publicly stated they will not be trading down and will be taking QBs. Fast forward 5 years, top 2 picks are incredible and the QB we forced a pick on at 3 (rated as the 23rd best player in the draft) is now out of football. Interesting tidbit, Russ Brandon is still with the team.

What exactly is the point to be debated in this thread that is devoid of new information? Are we just supposed to agree or disagree? I disagree.

There is a thread on the front page titled "Would You Trade Tyrod." Perhaps in an effort to avoid a myriad of duplicate threads, we could roll this into that thread? The premise is ridiculous and there is no need for a poll just because OP had an idea. Unless, that it, we want to see these gems of new threads: Would you right now trade TT for Mahomes Would you a little later trade TT for Kizer Would you retroactively trade Mario for Skelton

THANK YOU. Bear in mind this is coming from the guy who started a thread telling everyone his "sources"were positive LeSean was gone this offseason. When it turned out to be a load of garbage, he disappeared from the board for a month and then came back saying plans changed based on the shocking firing of Doug Whaley because "only the top brass knew about it" even though scouts were telling people well in advance they were all gone.

Because getting rid of LeSean was contingent upon that? Everyone and their momma was aware Whaley was on his way out. You ripped off a fake news headline and then disappeared from the board once you got called out on it.

May as well not restructure and eat the bigger hits this year to clear up more space for next year should any restructures be necessary. We're not close and I wouldn't want to push any more dead money into the future if we can avoid it. The lack of restructures actually indicates to me that the Fo finally has some self-awareness and is trying to get ride out the terrible cap position we're in.