Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Observer article regarding Rivera/GM


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#16 Bj-Monster23

Bj-Monster23

    Slam Newton

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,341 posts
  • LocationRaleigh NC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:16 PM

Would you really turn down a GM job if you were told that they're giving the current coach 1 more year to prove himself or he's gone? Because that is probably what JR is saying. Rivera has 1 year to have a winning and make the playoffs or he's done. Don't see that holding a GM prospect back


That's the point, it's now guaranteed to make the playoffs. You are hurting the coach before the season even start by telling him the only way he keeps his job is by making the playoffs. If that is the case, you might as well save him the trouble and let him go now.

#17 UNCrules2187

UNCrules2187

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,326 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:22 PM

That's the point, it's now guaranteed to make the playoffs. You are hurting the coach before the season even start by telling him the only way he keeps his job is by making the playoffs. If that is the case, you might as well save him the trouble and let him go now.


I'm pretty sure Rivera knows at this point that if he gets a third season, the only way he's getting a fourth is if he makes the playoffs. How many coaches are retained after three straight non-playoff years? Not many.

#18 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 16,276 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:26 PM

I remember I brought up a thread during the season in which I said we needed to hire our guy ASAP and I got a bunch of "we have plenty of time, blah blah blah..."

Well, I don't think many have considered this... Now that we've retained Rivera to this point, it's a sign that we're keeping him. Now, for those of you thinking we're going to go out and hire a big name GM, guess what? What new "big name" GM is wanting to come into an organization that has held onto their coach from the previous year so that they can't fully assert control over the football operations?

And now we're getting to the point that saying, "If he's not your guy, bring your guy in..." to any prospective GM candidate is a fallacy. We've strung it out long enough that likely even if we found a GM to come in with Rivera already in place and they fired him, who are they going to replace him with?

Just looking like a big build up to nothing.

#19 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,653 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:29 PM

Oh, there are people that have a clue. It's just that none of them are talking.



Morrison and Richardson

#20 Bj-Monster23

Bj-Monster23

    Slam Newton

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,341 posts
  • LocationRaleigh NC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:30 PM

I remember I brought up a thread during the season in which I said we needed to hire our guy ASAP and I got a bunch of "we have plenty of time, blah blah blah..."

Well, I don't think many have considered this... Now that we've retained Rivera to this point, it's a sign that we're keeping him. Now, for those of you thinking we're going to go out and hire a big name GM, guess what? What new "big name" GM is wanting to come into an organization that has held onto their coach from the previous year so that they can't fully assert control over the football operations?

And now we're getting to the point that saying, "If he's not your guy, bring your guy in..." to any prospective GM candidate is a fallacy. We've strung it out long enough that likely even if we found a GM to come in with Rivera already in place and they fired him, who are they going to replace him with?

Just looking like a big build up to nothing.


I completely agree with this. No GM will want to come in to somebody else guy. They want their own guy most of the time. You are pretty much limiting your choice of candidates if you tell them that they have to stick with Rivera.

#21 UNCrules2187

UNCrules2187

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,326 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:31 PM

I remember I brought up a thread during the season in which I said we needed to hire our guy ASAP and I got a bunch of "we have plenty of time, blah blah blah..."

Well, I don't think many have considered this... Now that we've retained Rivera to this point, it's a sign that we're keeping him. Now, for those of you thinking we're going to go out and hire a big name GM, guess what? What new "big name" GM is wanting to come into an organization that has held onto their coach from the previous year so that they can't fully assert control over the football operations?

And now we're getting to the point that saying, "If he's not your guy, bring your guy in..." to any prospective GM candidate is a fallacy. We've strung it out long enough that likely even if we found a GM to come in with Rivera already in place and they fired him, who are they going to replace him with?

Just looking like a big build up to nothing.


I think your GM logic is a fallacy. You said we needed to "hire our guy ASAP". Well, unless "our guy" was unemployed at the time, there's no way we could hire him because he's not allowed to interview. We seem to have zeroed in on our top two targets, Ross and Gettleman, as we requested permission to interview them the first day possible. Now, you've gotta let the process play out.

I'm sure teams like the Chiefs, Eagles, and Jaguars knew they would be firing their coaches/GMs long before Monday - why haven't they "hired their guys" yet?

#22 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 16,276 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:33 PM

I completely agree with this. No GM will want to come in to somebody else guy. They want their own guy most of the time. You are pretty much limiting your choice of candidates if you tell them that they have to stick with Rivera.

Yup, but I guess the brightside to that is, it puts on even footing with the Jets for Ross. Then again, who would you rather have as the incumbent coach? Ryan or Rivera?

Considering Rivera's lack of success and Ryan's lack of tact, I wouldn't be surprised if Ross doesn't take either job. Again, it wouldn't be a problem if he was bringing in his own guy.

#23 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 16,276 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:38 PM

I think your GM logic is a fallacy. You said we needed to "hire our guy ASAP". Well, unless "our guy" was unemployed at the time, there's no way we could hire him because he's not allowed to interview. We seem to have zeroed in on our top two targets, Ross and Gettleman, as we requested permission to interview them the first day possible. Now, you've gotta let the process play out.

I'm sure teams like the Chiefs, Eagles, and Jaguars knew they would be firing their coaches/GMs long before Monday - why haven't they "hired their guys" yet?

ASAP is what it means, "AS SOON AS POSSIBLE." So, ideally, we wouldn't need to hire a GM so quickly if the HC position was defined one way or another. But because the HC position hasn't been addressed, it adds to the urgency of finding a GM to assess it.

So, what I'm saying is, the whole deal has been poorly managed.

Is Rivera safe? Who knows? Will the GM be given say so on Rivera? Don't know. So, we really can't move forward without knowing one or the other.

Great, we put in a request to interview Ross and we've retained a head coach with a questionable resume while other HC candidates are already locking in interviews.

#24 carpanfan96

carpanfan96

    play hard, hit harder

  • ALL-PRO
  • 11,723 posts
  • LocationConcord, NC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:45 PM

The open GM and HC spots (Minus the team Reid goes too) are just in the interview stages, there's ton's of candidates that aren't available for interview because they don't have a bye week. It's also not out of question that a GM doesn't like the HC possibilities this season and would let Rivera keep his job for a season as a tryout.

#25 Shufdog

Shufdog

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,250 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:46 PM

For anyone not wanting to read the entire article (483 words) I will summarize. "Its (insert day here) and we still dont know poo..."



You counted how many words that were in the article???

#26 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • ALL-PRO
  • 42,271 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:48 PM

Morrison and Richardson


There's another question.

Anyone know where Danny Morrison is?

#27 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,350 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:50 PM

I think (hope) he would have fired Rivera by now if he was going to do it... but maybe he's stalling in hopes that someone else hires Chip Kelly so he doesn't have to ask "who is Chip Kelly?" LOL

#28 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,653 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:51 PM

There's another question.

Anyone know where Danny Morrison is?



Neither should be really hard to find honestly.
But that would require the Observer staff to put down their USA Today's and Turn off "Roy Williams Talk" and actually report instead of pulling ideas off here for Articles.

#29 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,170 posts

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:53 PM

I remember I brought up a thread during the season in which I said we needed to hire our guy ASAP and I got a bunch of "we have plenty of time, blah blah blah..."

Well, I don't think many have considered this... Now that we've retained Rivera to this point, it's a sign that we're keeping him. Now, for those of you thinking we're going to go out and hire a big name GM, guess what? What new "big name" GM is wanting to come into an organization that has held onto their coach from the previous year so that they can't fully assert control over the football operations?

And now we're getting to the point that saying, "If he's not your guy, bring your guy in..." to any prospective GM candidate is a fallacy. We've strung it out long enough that likely even if we found a GM to come in with Rivera already in place and they fired him, who are they going to replace him with?

Just looking like a big build up to nothing.

the problem was that we couldn't talk to really anyone deserving the job until the season was over.

there was literally nothing that could be done other than researching people and even then you couldn't call their team and talk about them or really call around without tipping your hat early.

and the fact that we haven't fired rivera yet isn't a sign that we aren't going to fire him. not necessarily anyway. it could be that is a call they want the new GM to make.

if JR is concerned about being competitive, i can't imagine he's thrilled with the record rivera has put up so far and the fact that it took so long for him to "trend upward", esp. if he was never actually completely sold on rivera like some have suggested.

i doubt it would take much encouraging from the new GM to move on from rivera if he wanted to.

that said, JR isn't a guy that likes change and takes waaaayyyyy too long to make decisions and if you think that firing hurney happened quickly, i'd counter with hurney should have been let go when fox was.

#30 mwright350

mwright350

    Thy Jimmies shall be Rustled

  • ALL-PRO
  • 1,688 posts
  • LocationChina Grove, NC

Posted 03 January 2013 - 01:55 PM

As aggravated as I am about the delay and as annoyed as convinced as I am that the longer this goes on the less likely it is we will fire Rivera I don't think we've passed the point of no return as far as getting rid of him, I also don't think, if the meeting actually happens tomorrow, that delay means he's staying.

If JR is really going to decide what to do and not the new GM then it is possible that the delay was so he could review the end of the season (possibly Accorsi as well) and make a decision with his full body of work after Hurney was let go.

I will not be at all surprised if Rivera is retained and given a year under a new GM to continue improvement, in fact I expect it, but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion either. Richardson might come up tomorrow and let him go.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com