Rod Graves Signs 3 Year Extension

[kerouac9]

Why do I need to back up my argument. You proved it for me by your own comments. You only want to keep 7 players. If you don't consider that a complete team rebuild, you have no conception of what the word rebuild means.

Isn't this thread about how Rod Graves got a 3-year extention? Because that's what the title of the thread says. I'm pretty sure that your arguement is that Rod Graves is a good GM who deserved that extention. Since I proved that for you, I'd really appreciate it if you could outline the reasons taht I gave for him staying around.

Thanks in advance. I'd hate to think that you're just making things up or changing the subject because you know that your opinion has no evidence behind it or that you are being intellectually dishonest and a sophist.

 

[nidan]

Well I will tell you what I have followed this team for at least 4 years, and all 4 years have been draft holdouts. All 4 years have been Graves contract negotiations. And that is not even close to doing business the same as the rest of the NFL.

I finally understand you Joe [I think].

From that perspective you are absolutly correct. See 40's reponse

 

[joeshmo]

I finally understand you Joe [I think].

NOOOOOOOO.

There goes my mysterious aura I had going for me.

 

[40yearfan]

Isn't this thread about how Rod Graves got a 3-year extention? Because that's what the title of the thread says. I'm pretty sure that your arguement is that Rod Graves is a good GM who deserved that extention. Since I proved that for you, I'd really appreciate it if you could outline the reasons taht I gave for him staying around.

Thanks in advance. I'd hate to think that you're just making things up or changing the subject because you know that your opinion has no evidence behind it or that you are being intellectually dishonest and a sophist.

Do I think RG deserved his extention? Absolutely and if you haven't gleaned that fact from my previous posts, you haven't paid attention to a single thing I've said. My position is simple. Look at the talent level we had 3 years ago and look at the talent level we have now. It's much better.

The other part of it is the fact that I don't want to have to start all over again with a new GM and a new coach. I think RG is adequate and is smart enough to get better and become a more than adequate GM. I think MB truly wants to win and he believes that RG is the man for the job at this present time and since it's his money and he's privy to much more info than I, I will defer to his position.

These are also indisputable (to coin a word from you) facts and put a completely different picture on the issue. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

[kerouac9]

Do I think RG deserved his extention? Absolutely and if you haven't gleaned that fact from my previous posts, you haven't paid attention to a single thing I've said. My position is simple. Look at the talent level we had 3 years ago and look at the talent level we have now. It's much better.

Based on what, though, 40? Because the only possible metric for "talent level" is wins and losses, and this team is worse than it was 3 years ago at that metric. It's better than it was 4 years ago when Rod Graves took control, but that was a team that almost literally started from scratch and was systematically dismanted.

The other part of it is the fact that I don't want to have to start all over again with a new GM and a new coach. I think RG is adequate and is smart enough to get better and become a more than adequate GM. I think MB truly wants to win and he believes that RG is the man for the job at this present time and since it's his money and he's privy to much more info than I, I will defer to his position.

These are also indisputable (to coin a word from you) facts and put a completely different picture on the issue. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

Actually, 40, by definition that second-to-last paragraph are all opinions. "Adequate" is a qualatitive measure. If you only believe that RG is good because MB says that he is, then why even discuss it? MB's opinion doesn't change the picture, it just places a rose-colored filter on 4-12, 6-10, 5-11, 5-11.

Thanks for clearing that up. I guess I just hope that the front office executives for my team are smarter and savvier than I am, especially because I only have the experience that I've gained from watching the TV and going to the games. I guess I'm more than a little disappointed that the last four years of the Rod Graves regime sure makes it seem like that isn't the case. Forgive me for that disappointment. I'm happy for you that you seem to think that everything's peachy as long as Michael Bidwill says it is.

 

[Russ Smith]

The reason Graves extension surprised me was quite simple. It's obvious the talent on this team improved in the last 3 years, but the record actually got worse not better. That clearly points to coaching problems and that's why Dennis Green is not employed here today.

But who hired Green and let him make those coaching mistakes, if it wasn't Graves then, is it Graves now with the new coach?

 

[D-Dogg]

The reason Graves extension surprised me was quite simple. It's obvious the talent on this team improved in the last 3 years, but the record actually got worse not better. That clearly points to coaching problems and that's why Dennis Green is not employed here today.

But who hired Green and let him make those coaching mistakes, if it wasn't Graves then, is it Graves now with the new coach?

What I assume, from everything I've read, heard and seen, is that Mike Bidwill had a strong hand, if not the hand, in hiring Denny. Graves was part of it, but not the driving force.

It is clear this time around that Graves is leading the charge (his demeanor and interviews about what "he" will see, and what "he" is looking for). It looks as if this coaching search is squarely on him. Which makes sense to me, given the extension that he will be held solely accountable this go-around.

I could be wrong, of course but that is how it appears. Seems Mike is taking a big step back on this one.

 

[40yearfan]

Actually, 40, by definition that second-to-last paragraph are all opinions. "Adequate" is a qualatitive measure. If you only believe that RG is good because MB says that he is, then why even discuss it? MB's opinion doesn't change the picture, it just places a rose-colored filter on 4-12, 6-10, 5-11, 5-11.

Based on what, though, 40? Because the only possible metric for "talent level" is wins and losses, and this team is worse than it was 3 years ago at that metric. It's better than it was 4 years ago when Rod Graves took control, but that was a team that almost literally started from scratch and was systematically dismanted.

There is only so much a GM can do in regards to W's and L's. If he thinks he has the right people and the coach agrees with him, he's done his job. If it doesn't work out, the majority of the problem has to lie with the coaching and talent. And think about this. As you said, we had to basically start from scratch 4 years ago. By keeping RG, we won't have to go through that process again. Any GM worth his salt is going to want to make changes. I think because of the talent level, we don't need to make a change except at the team level (coaching)

Thanks for clearing that up. I guess I just hope that the front office executives for my team are smarter and savvier than I am, especially because I only have the experience that I've gained from watching the TV and going to the games. I guess I'm more than a little disappointed that the last four years of the Rod Graves regime sure makes it seem like that isn't the case. Forgive me for that disappointment. I'm happy for you that you seem to think that everything's peachy as long as Michael Bidwill says it is.

I do put a lot of trust in MB. He is much different than his father. New ideas, new methods and a real desire to win. I like what he's done since he has taken over. He just needs to turn those results into W's and L's.

 

[football karma]

The reason Graves extension surprised me was quite simple. It's obvious the talent on this team improved in the last 3 years, but the record actually got worse not better. That clearly points to coaching problems and that's why Dennis Green is not employed here today.

But who hired Green and let him make those coaching mistakes, if it wasn't Graves then, is it Graves now with the new coach?

Russ -- a pragmatic point.

While I think its a GM's job to say -- dont cut Pete Kendall. We are keeping Shelton until we get a better option.

I dont think its his job to say -- play Wells at right tackle, or, your are down by two scores late -- you may want to go to the hurry up.

The reality is that you may not have liked Oliver Ross -- but after Bertrand Berry, I probably would have given Denny the benefit of the doubt.

I dont think you bring in a high profile guy with a turnaround reputation and then, at least early on, dont give him the things he says he wants to get the job done.

Management gave Denny all the rope he wanted, and he hanged himself with it.

 

[Russ Smith]

Russ -- a pragmatic point.

While I think its a GM's job to say -- dont cut Pete Kendall. We are keeping Shelton until we get a better option.

I dont think its his job to say -- play Wells at right tackle, or, your are down by two scores late -- you may want to go to the hurry up.

The reality is that you may not have liked Oliver Ross -- but after Bertrand Berry, I probably would have given Denny the benefit of the doubt.

I dont think you bring in a high profile guy with a turnaround reputation and then, at least early on, dont give him the things he says he wants to get the job done.

Management gave Denny all the rope he wanted, and he hanged himself with it.

I guess what I'm saying is if Graves didn't have the authority then to override Green, does he have the authority now to override the next coach?

If that's the mistake he made before, and he seemed to admit it was, will he make the same mistake again, or does this new extension give him the pop to
step in and stop that this time around?

Say we hire Chow and he announces he wants to hire his golfing buddies to coach the CB's and TE's, is Graves now going to step in and say hey qualified coaches only?

 

[NMCard]

Say we hire Chow and he announces he wants to hire his golfing buddies to coach the CB's and TE's, is Graves now going to step in and say hey qualified coaches only?

That would depend on being able to fit a qualified coach in the ownerships budget.

 

[football karma]

I guess what I'm saying is if Graves didn't have the authority then to override Green, does he have the authority now to override the next coach?

If that's the mistake he made before, and he seemed to admit it was, will he make the same mistake again, or does this new extension give him the pop to
step in and stop that this time around?

Say we hire Chow and he announces he wants to hire his golfing buddies to coach the CB's and TE's, is Graves now going to step in and say hey qualified coaches only?

Using your example -- I think its a legitimate thing for a GM to have input (and final approval) on the staff.

I do think that a GM should give his coach every benefit of the doubt on who plays vs doesnt, game strategy, etc

The difference now is that Denny showed up with a great deal of head coaching experience, a great record and credibility on turning franchises around ---

I would put 90%+ of the local and national media (the best we have for lack of us getting to hear NFL front office opinion) as saying Denny was the right guy.

I understand why Rod deferred to him -- particularly early.

Any coach showing up today doesnt have that same gravitas, so will be subject to more due dilligence by the front office.