The Athletic: Which NFL teams have the best front offices? Head coaches and execs cast their votes

[Gregg]

At the opposite end of the spectrum fed up Giants have organized to have banners fly over MetLife Stadium voicing their displeasure of their trainwreck of a team for this week's Giants - Chargers game.

 

https://nypost.com/2025/09/25/sports/plane-banners-to-fly-over-metlife-stadium-again-as-giants-fans-are-fed-up/

[chris heff]

25 minutes ago, boyst said:

Or was it Brady? Or was it winning?

This is about teams front office, not QB, or winning records. The Patriots front office for decades was Bill Belichick. They had no GM and as far as I know, they still don’t have that particular designation. 

[boyst]

20 minutes ago, chris heff said:

This is about teams front office, not QB, or winning records. The Patriots front office for decades was Bill Belichick. They had no GM and as far as I know, they still don’t have that particular designation. 

I get it but I'm just saying that winning makes everything better. I'm amazed how quickly people forgot how Siriani and Roseman were ready to be run out of Phili 2 years ago. 

[Not at the table Karlos]

6 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Your 2 sentences seem contradictory, no?

 

Their culture is players with poor character. 

[SoTier]

11 hours ago, boyst said:

I always laugh at these lists because it's always the winning teams the top. Everything is good when you're winning. Look at the Patriots front office. Very little has changed in the last 10 years. Yet weren't they always at the top of this when they were winning?

 

Scott Pioli was the Pats' VP of Player Personnel for the first 8 years of Belichick's tenure.  Pioli and Belichick built the foundation of the Pats dynasty with good drafts and judicious trades.    After Pioli left in 2009, Belichick ran the FO and the quality of the Pats' drafting declined significantly, and even though they kept winning, I don't think that their FO was considered top class in the last decade of Belichick's tenure.   By the time he left, the Pats were larger devoid of young talent because of poor drafting.

  

11 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

 Good point. Rams have a SB win recently though.  The Ravens have continually floundered.  I’d have Philly at 1, KC 2, Rams could be 3, us 4.  Ravens have a coaching issue, IMO. 

 

I think that the Ravens FO has been outstanding for their entire existence under Ozzie Newsome (1996-2018) and his hand-picked successor, Eric DeCosta (2019-present).   They have made the playoffs 16 times in 30 years, won 2 SBs, and in Newsome's last draft, found Lamar.  DeCosta's tenure has seen the Ravens make the playoffs 5 of 6 years while building one of the most talented rosters in the NFL.

 

I agree that the Ravens' recent playoff failures can be traced to coaching, too, which I suppose is also part of the FO's responsibility.  I'm not a fan of Harbaugh's handling of Lamar, especially early in his career, and I think that he's not nearly as good a HC as his record would suggest.  The talent the Ravens have hides many of his flaws.

 

11 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

They did, but they also basically turned the Lions into a super team with the pieces they were able to get from that trade. Should that not be a ding against them?  Essentially ushering in an era due to their trade where another team will be far better than them consistently? 

 

The trade wouldn't have mattered much to the Rams if Sheila Ford Harp hadn't taken over control of the Lions from her mother in 2020.  She hired Brad Holmes as GM in 2021 who hired Dan Campbell as HC and traded Stafford.  If Mrs Ford was still in charge, the Lions would have probably not even considered trading Stafford.

 

 

 

Edited September 26 by SoTier