Cash

Finally, the authoritative word on this story: http://www.nma.tv/manti-teo-notre-dame-football-star-hoaxed-hoaxster/

Well said, as were SJBF's posts upthread. I would add that even beyond the overt lies (we caught each other's eye after the Stanford game, vacationed in Hawaii, etc.), Te'o still comes across poorly in the scenario where he's the victim. His family thought he was going to marry this girl, Te'o talked about her as the love of his life, etc. Now the story is that this was an online-only (and also telephone) relationship. Those two accounts don't jibe well with one other, even though they could technically both be true. If Te'o's the victim, here's what he needs to do: First, provide the type of evidence SJBF is talking about. There should be mounds of it, since Te'o alleged that they would have 8-hour phone conversations and talk on the phone every night. Second, he needs to produce the female hoaxer who was talking on the phone with him every night. Deadspin has given us Tuiasasopo, who seems to be the principle hoaxer, but if Te'o's story is to be believed, there must've been a woman who was just as deeply involved. I'm guessing a mastermind hoaxer of this magnitude would've made all calls on a burner phone, but she would have to have some significant connection to Tuiasasopo. Maybe ND's private investigators already found this woman, and that's why ND is so willing to stand by Te'o? Maybe. But if that's the case, the info will be leaked sooner or later, or the press will find her on their own. Either way, if the female hoaxer exists, she can be found, and if Te'o wants to clear his name, she must be found. Those things would be enough to convince me that his current story is true, and that what he's guilty of is being an idiot and an embellisher. (I.e., embellishing the significance of his online-only relationship by lying about how often they talked on the phone and met in person.) EDIT: A couple people have mentioned this, but it bears repeating: If Te'o was so in love with this girl to the point his family thought they would marry, why didn't he ever visit her grave or her family? I get the reason he never went to the fake funeral, and it's possible that the hoaxers set up a fake address for him to send flowers to, but she fake died in September. He then went 3 months without paying a visit to the "love of [his] life"'s final resting place or family? ND even went to USC after the fake death, right? That's a pretty quick trip up the coast up to NoCal -- why didn't he take it? This doesn't prove anything -- everyone grieves in their own way -- but it seems odd to me, and it doesn't pass the smell test.

I didn't think of the gay angle until people brought it up here. It's the only non-sociopathic explanation I can think of so far. Raymond Burr and his publicist apparently made up a fake wife and child who fake died in a fake plane crash to explain why he could never marry again and would stay single forever. Bingo. Bingo. And claimed to have vacationed in Hawaii. The Dad angle is interesting to me. He claimed to have talked to her over the phone after she got released from Imaginary Hospital. Was Dad lying, or was there a female hoaxer? If so, who is she? If Dad was lying, this makes the twitter necro-beard angle pretty suspect. However, if Dad was duped, that's still very much in play. Obvious troll is obvious. Two ways: 1.) Having a known sociopath on your roster is not good for team chemistry. 2.) The argument in favor of Te'o is that his physical skills aren't the best, but he's such an amazing leader and will definitely be the heart & soul of your defense, that'll make up for it. Te'o boosters frequently refer to the grandma/girlfriend death story to point out his strength of character. But if he made up the girlfriend, that shows not only an extreme lack of character, but the presence of some extremely unpleasant personality traits. And since it's public now, all of his other teammates will know this as well. It'll be very hard for him to be the team leader at that point. Bolded part is key. No acknowledgement of his prior claims to have met her in person at the Stanford game, or to have brought her with him to Hawaii. Te'o either lied in his earlier interviews or he's lying here.

Crossman's ranks: 2005 (CAR): 5th overall/10th weighted 2006 (CAR): 24th/23rd 2007 (CAR): 30th/28th 2008 (CAR): 10th/8th 2009 (CAR): 29th/25th 2010 (DET): 11th/15th 2011 (DET): 29th/31st 2012 (DET): 30th/23rd Pros: Has real NFL experience in the job he's doing for us. Has had some success in his position. Cons: Has had more failure than success. Has presided over some really awful units.. All in all, I have no problems with replacing DeHaven -- our coverage units were bad last year, the punters and kickers didn't seem to be handled well, and I don't give the ST coach much credit for a dynamic returner like McKelvin. McKelvin was an awesome KR/PR in college and very good with the Bills prior to DeHaven. I don't know that Crossman will do any better, but at least he's had a couple good seasons. Maybe he's just been laden with really bad talent on the special teams units? Don't like this hire, but I don't hate it either. Assuming Bobby April's still pissed at the Bills, I don't know who's available who would be a better candidate. I'd also like to point out that Marrone's SU teams were consistently awful on special teams. Just terrible. Won't necessarily translate to the NFL, but it is relevant.

Haven't listened to the interview yet, but read most of the quotes. Very enthused by what I've seen. My reservations about Pettine were 1.) How much of the D was run by Rex Ryan, and 2.) Is he a 3-4 guy? Because if so, that sets us back. #1 won't be answered until we see the D in games, so I won't worry about it till then. But I'm definitely not worried about #2 after Pettine's comments. I feel pretty good about this hire. Pettine has been able to learn from a lot of greats, and hopefully he's ready to come into his own.

Drafted 9th overall. 2nd round, 38th overall 5th round, 154th overall Undrafted in 241 selections 15th overall 9th overall, and isn't it a little early to start calling him a premium player? Carolina's defense wasn't exactly setting the world on fire last year. My point is not that Kuechly sucks. It's that either A.) He hasn't become a premium player yet, or B.) Even having a premium player at MLB doesn't do much for your defense. Obviously having a good MLB, especially in terms of the defensive quarterbacking, is good. But I disagree that it's critical. I'll take Aldon Smith over Patrick Willis 100 times out of 100. Who was the Giants' premium MLB in either of their 2 recent Super Bowl runs? Here's a quick summary of my argument: 1.) I disagree that it's critical to have a premium MLB, but do acknowledge that it's good to have one. 2.) I don't think drafting an interior LB in the top 10 is smart, because most of them don't become premium players (more on that later). I will concede that if your MLB winds up becoming an elite player/defensive quarterback, then that's worth a top 10 pick. 3.) I don't see much evidence that suggests that Manti Te'o will be a transformative player on the level of Ray Lewis, Urlacher, Junior Seau, Singletary, etc. 4.) Therefore, I do not want the Bills to draft Manti Te'o at #8 overall. No prediction on whether they will or not. Lastly, here are the ILB/MLBs drafted in the top half of the first round since 2000. I don't find the list very impressive, but some may disagree. Luke Kuechly Rolando McLain Aaron Curry Brian Cushing Keith Rivers Jerrod Mayo Patrick Willis Lawrence Timmons A.J. Hawk Ernie Sims Derrick Johnson Jonathan Vilma Dan Morgan LaVar Arrington Brian Urlacher

Any QB metric that fails to account for the QB's ability to complete passes is probably going to be very limited. Granted, winning games will tend to correlate somewhat with completing passes, but it's pretty far removed.

And yet, somehow, multiple trades happen in the first round every year. I think I would enjoy watching the draft with you: "Another trade?! Inconceivable!" "You keep using that word. I don't think that word means what you think it means." Good breakdown; I agree with just about all of this. I'm not going to crucify Te'o on one game, but I definitely don't want him at #8, even in a weak draft.

Pretty good breakdown. The counter to the pros would be: 1.) In B-more, was first assistant D-line coach, then promoted to OLB coach. Not even LB coach, just OLBs. Not a ton of responsibility. 2.) How much work did he actually do as the Jets' nominal D-coordinator? If a team with a defensive-minded head coach tried to hire Curtis Modkins as their OC, we would laugh at them for days on end. I've been under the impression that Rex was his own DC up until I clicked on this thread. Still, his resume beats out George Edwards', so that's something I guess. EDIT: Hit "post" too soon. I should also mention that even if he wasn't really coordinating the D for the Jets the last 4 years, he was presumably learning on the job from Rex Ryan, who is one of the best in the biz. So even in the worst case, there's some hope. I really really don't want to switch back to a 3-4, though.

Very good hypothetical. I would prefer the proven guy who's almost certainly a short-timer, whether that's a fired HC or not. (Monte Kiffen was mentioned in another thread as a possible DC, as an example.) Because even if the up-and-comer is really good, he'll still be a candidate for vacancies in the next couple years. Any successful coordinator usually gets HC interviews. And with a relatively inexperienced HC, I want more experience and a track record of NFL success for the coordinators.

I like the fact that he specifically said he wanted the coordinators to have NFL experience... hopefully that means experience in that job in the NFL, not just a QB coach and a D-line coach.

I'll take your word for it on the departures -- I do remember that the one year had way more than the other year, but don't remember which year it was. Careful what you wish for -- Gregg Williams was a tough disciplinarian as well. I think most fans put way too much stock into things like how tough a guy is or how animated he gets on the sidelines. Tony Dungy and Bill Cowher have won the same number of Super Bowls.

I very much see Glennon as a Locker/Ponder/Gabbert type. I'd rather have no one than one of those 3. Honestly, unless someone jumps out at me (I don't watch much college football till draft time, except for SU), I think I'd rather have us take someone in round 2. That way, if he busts (and probably will), we can come back and draft QB at the top next year. But you can't draft a guy in the first round and give him only 1 year. I could live with Nassib in the 2nd or 3rd round. It'll be interesting to see where he winds up being slotted. He's definitely not worth a first-round pick, though.

Actually they went 4-7 his first year, then 8-5 the next year. Then 5-7 in year three, and another 8-5 to round it out. And I don't think only 6 scholarship players left the first year, but I'm not sure. I know the number is around 22 for the first 2 years combined.

Yeah, I'd have no problem with Marrone bringing a couple of his Cuse staffers along with him, especially at the position coach level. I'm sure I could live with exactly 1 of his coordinators if it came down to it, but I'd really much prefer coordinators with NFL experience. Apparently one of the reasons Marrone was wiling/looking to leave his "dream job" (his words) was because SU wasn't able to pay his assistants enough, so I'm hoping Marrone agrees with me. In addition, SU's special teams were awful all 4 years under Marrone, and he kept switching up the coaching responsibilities for special teams. I don't think he ever actually had a dedicated special teams coach, but if he did, that guy didn't last long. I think Marrone coached special teams himself a couple of years, and had one of the position coaches do it the other years. I think it was the TE coach doubling as special teams coach this past year? Not sure. Anyway, I'm kind of hoping that this was one of the "SU cheaps out their coaching assistants" things, and that Marrone is capable of hiring a real special teams coach and devoting enough practice time to making it work. I can live without the elite special teams we enjoyed under April, but SU's were terrible. Think about how bad our kick/punt coverage was this year, but imagine that our return game was even worse. That was SU's special teams the last 4 years.

Good point, I didn't even think about the money. Taking a demotion would earn him the same money as not working at all, assuming his Bears contract had offsets in it. If I'm Lovie (or his agent), I tell people that a Super Bowl (losing) coach with over 80 career wins is a head coach and head coach only. As for whom I'd want, a lot of people have tossed around Marrone's Cuse coordinators, but count me out. Again, I did like the job Marrone did at SU, but bringing along both his coordinators is kind of ridiculous. This is the big leagues; lets try to act like it. Besides, I'm very sick of having the new HC's staff be primarily nobodies from the college ranks who are billed as "teachers". I know both Gailey and Jauron raved about how their crews of chumps were such great teachers, and I think at least one of Greggggo and Meathead did as well. "Teachers" is code for "no NFL experience at this job." Marrone has 4 years of HC experience -- none in the NFL -- and 3 years of NFL O-coordinator experience, but somewhat analogous to Curtis Modkins' position the last 3 years. I think his success his much more likely if he can surround himself with guys with some NFL experience and particularly NFL success. I'm afraid I don't know many coordinators or position coaches around the league, so I don't have any specific names in mind, but that's the profile I'm looking for. Out of the 6 other fired coaches, there's probably a couple decent coordinators. I'd be more encouraged to see our coordinators be making lateral moves than getting promoted. I.e., our OC should ideally be a fired HC or OC, and likewise with our DC. Of course, the all-time terrible promotion was hiring a fired Offensive Coordinator, who then spent a year out of football, to be your Head Coach. We said it was a terrible hire at the time, and we were proven right. This hire is a lot more defensible; let's hope it goes well. Go Bills!

Guys, seriously? Lovie Smith has been an NFL head coach for 9 seasons, with a total record of 84-66 (3-3 playoffs), with 3 playoff appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (with Rex Grossman at QB, no less), and went 10-6 this past year. He's going to accept a D-coordinator job? And even if he would, do you really think he'd take that job with the Bills? He flew out to Arizona so the Bills could interview him. By all accounts, he really wanted the Bills job, possibly the most out of any of the 6 non-Bears coaching vacancies. He's clearly the #2 most qualified and accomplished candidate on the market behind Andy Reid, and clearly #1 out of candidates the Bills interviewed. But they spurned him and went with a relatively unknown/untested college coach whose resume is questionable*. That's their prerogative, and let's hope it works out. But if you were Lovie, with his resume, and you threw yourself at a crap team like the Bills only to be beat out by a less-qualified candidate, would you accept a career stepdown to work for that less-qualified candidate? I say hell no. I think at the end of the day, he gets a HC job, but if he doesn't, I think it's more likely he takes a year off than steps down to DC. *Homers, relax. Questionable does not mean bad. It means there's legit questions. I liked the job he did at SU, but the bottom line is that his best season (twice) was 8-5 and a Pinstripe Bowl win. There's nothing there that says he's a lock for NFL success. Remember, SU was a very disappointing 5-7 in 2011, and Marrone was pretty much on the hot seat after the weak start this year.

Fun watch, thanks for posting! Although it would've been more fun if there weren't so many games with only 1 clip.

We did give Jauron an additional season. It was terrible. Ham Shandy keeps ignoring this, while avoiding every question/argument that's at the core of this discussion, and only arguing ridiculous peripherals like, "could anyone have predicted Jim Harbaugh would be a good coach or Steve Spurrier would be a bad coach?" or "how do we know the players have lost confidence?" I certainly don't know for sure, but after 8 pages of this thread, it seems to me that our friend Hambone Calrissian is either very young or a troll. If it's the former, free pass. I was probably worse at that age. If it's the latter, it's frankly one of the more annoying trolls I've seen. But that's just my preference; I much prefer the over-the-top comedic trolling of a crayonz or a Jimmy Spaghetti, Boastful Jets Fan. (I know he didn't/doesn't call himself Jimmy Spaghetti, but I'm not looking it up. Close enough.) I mean, I give credit for getting me to bite so many times, but it's pretty weak bait. Start arguing that losing to Seattle gives us a playoff tiebreaker and have people take that bait, now that's what impresses me.

Totally agree, and that's one of the reasons I don't want us to sign Smith (unless we also draft a QB, at which point why not just keep Fitz and draft a QB?). But the one valid point Ham Sando has made in this thread is that you can't predict how good a new hire will be, and certainly can't expect him to be as good as Harbaugh. I don't see that as a good enough argument on its own, because even a 1% chance of the new guy being good is better than the 0% chance (as I see it) of Chan becoming a good coach. I think the point I'm trying to make is that there's value in keeping a guy with talent around, even if he doesn't show it as often as you'd like, because the problem may be as much coaching as anything else. When you finally find that good coach, he'll be successful a lot sooner if he's got some talent to work with when he arrives. This doesn't mean that every high draft pick gets to stay on the team forever: Cutting Aaron Maybin when they did was absolutely the right move, and if Aaron Williams stays this bad over the next couple years, there's no way you could bring him back. EDIT: Just want to say that I guess part of my point is that one of the reasons we've continued to suck these 13 years is that we haven't been keeping our players around. Cut Fletcher, draft Poz. Let Poz walk, sign Barnett. Trade McGahee for a pair of 3rd rounders, draft Lynch at #12 instead of bolstering the O-line. Trade Lynch for a pair of 4th rounders, draft Spiller at #9 instead of getting a pass rusher. Winfield, Clements, and Jabari Greer all left as free agents in their primes and were at least okay starters elsewhere. Now, I don't think that Gregggggg or Meathead or Dick "Walking Dead" Jauron would have done very well if we had retained all those guys or even most of them. But maybe Jauron goes 9-7 one year instead of his standard 7-9. Maybe we would've even snuck into the playoffs as a #6 seed one year.

Very good point, although we should really just look at 49ers draftees who were with the team pre-Harbaugh, which removes Aldon Smith, Colin Kaepernick, and Bruce Miller (FB). Actually, looking at the 49ers' last two drafts, they're kind of underwhelming for such a good team. Obviously Aldon Smith is a big-time difference maker, but Kaepernick didn't play a down last year and they went 13-3. Bruce Miller is a fullback. Kendall Hunter & LaMichael James are decent players, but very replaceable. No one else ever plays, near as I can tell. Anyway, the point is that the 49ers have a loaded team, but it's mostly loaded with players drafted before the current head coach was hired. And yet the team was terrible then. Granted, there've also been some free agent signings, but it really looks like the big difference is coaching. Which is an argument against "continuity," but I'd like to get a little more nuanced here. Think about some of those 1st-round picks who are/were starting for the 49ers. Alex Smith, Vernon Davis, and Michael Crabtree were all considered busts at one point or another. (In fairness, Davis turned it around under Singletary, but that wasn't until his 4th year in the league.) Most teams would have parted ways with at least 2 of them, if not all 3, well before Harbaugh was able to turn the ship around. Alex Smith even re-signed with the 49ers after his contract expired. So in that regard, here's a very strong case study for continuity. But "continuity" in this case doesn't mean retain the head coach, it means retain the players. Which I agree with. (Example: Obviously we all want Byrd & Levitre back, but what about McKelvin? He's a comparable bust to Crabtree or Smith, and he's shown this year that he can help a team in the right situation. And maybe the next coach can get a little more out of him.) I don't want Gailey fired in favor of someone who will truly blow it up, cutting veterans left & right because they don't suit his system or whatever. I do want Gailey fired in favor of someone who might do a better job of getting our talented players to play up to their abilities. And if that guy doesn't show any of that ability in a few years, then fire him and try again. But I think there is real value in a certain amount of roster stability, as long as it's conditional. For example, when the 49ers re-signed Alex Smith, it was with the full understanding that he had no claim on the starting job and was likely to be a backup. That's an extremely rare attitude for a first-round pick, let alone #1 overall. In the case of Fitz, once we have a replacement starter on the roster, he'll probably need to be cut, just because he's making starter money.

Don't know a ton about him yet, but from what I've read so far, sounds like a stay-away. Every positive profile I've seen has basically read, "He wasn't that great in college, and his numbers are underwhelming, but he has all the physical tools. Think about how good he COULD be with the right coaching!" I reserve the right to change my mind as I find out more info, but for now, I say no thanks.

I notice you're still ducking my questions. Here they are again, to save you the trouble of going back a page: 1. "Would the 49ers have righted the ship (winning records, playoff appearances, etc.) by keeping one of the coaches they fired from 2003-2012 instead of firing them?" 2. "Would the Bills have made the playoffs by now if Gregg Williams, Mike Mularkey, or Dick Jauron had been retained as head coach?" I'm guessing the answer to #2 is no, based on your comments above? But I'll be honest, I'm having trouble understanding your argument here. You say that blowing things up after 3 years won't lead to winning, and use Spurrier as an example of a guy who was thought to be the savior, but sucked. But Gailey's just as bad. Shouldn't the Redskins have kept Spurrier in the sake of continuity? You say you weren't on board with giving Jauron a 4th year, but you are for Gailey. Why? In hindsight, do you wish we'd kept Jauron longer and given him a 5th year? If not, what has Gailey shown you in the last 3 years that suggests that unlike Jauron, he is a good coach that will turn things around? How is Gailey different from Spurrier or Jauron?

Plus his contract is expiring, so even if he looks good, you need to sign him to a new deal, and he needs to be willing to take it. After being inactive for 14 straight games, with the coach heavily implying that he's too stupid to learn the playbook, would T-Jax be very interested in returning, even after starting the last 2? If he was promised the starting job and given a significant raise, probably. But that would be a huge risk for the team based on just 2 starts in meaningless games. The T-Jax trade was a minor gamble that lost. There's no way of turning it from a loss into a win, so I have no problem with keeping him on the bench for the last 2. If nothing else, just so that he can't be sold as the change we can believe in next year, based on a couple decent performances in meaningless games. The guy's been a starter for what, 3 seasons? If he was going to be anything great, we'd have seen it by now. He's not terrible, but he'll never be a major upgrade over Fitz. And if we're going to bring back Chan, we should be swinging for the fences with our next QB, not trying to bunt for a single. If we swing and miss, the team crashes, Chan's fired (that's a good thing), and we take another swing at both coach and QB.

My concern is that Fitz is made the fall guy, and Chan is brought back and allowed to draft "his guy" at QB in the first round. Because I expect that "his guy" would be cut out of the Blaine Gabbert/Christian Ponder/Jake Locker mold, and the team would fail miserably. But that sets up Gailey to be the fall guy in 2013, and whatever new coach is hired will stick with Blaikian Plockert for another year or two and continue to fail miserably. That sets up Nix to be the fall guy, and at that point, it's a "blow it up" situation. I feel like there's some merit in continuity, but more on the GM level, and with the understanding that we need an upgrade at QB. I really think there's enough talent on this team right now to make the playoffs, and that's *with* Fitz at QB. Improve the coaching and QB, draft well and re-sign our free agents, and we could really build something.