Flawed owner involvement is one of worst-kept secrets in sports

Pages : [1] 2

MTK
10-30-2009, 12:45 PM
Interesting read

Owner involvement is one of worst-kept secrets in sports - Ross Tucker - SI.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/ross_tucker/10/28/owners/index.html)

SmootSmack
10-30-2009, 12:58 PM
Great read. I hear about various levels of involvement from owners all over the league. The only owner that I've heard is truly a 100% hands-off owner (unless absolutely necessary) is Paul Allen of the Seahawks.

SkinFanatic
10-30-2009, 01:07 PM
I think Jones and Snyder are the 2 prime examples of overinvolved owners. The difference between them being that Jones actually played football and has an understanding of the game. But then you have examples like Kraft and Rooney, who know their place and allow those they hire to do the job they're paid to do. I don't think anyone is under the false hope that Snyder or any owner will stay out of all decisions. Like the writer said, it's their dime. But I'm not buying that an owner's heavy involvement in football ops is inevitable. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary.

skinsfan69
10-30-2009, 01:53 PM
I think most owners in the NFL don't meddle. What I like about Jones is he at least doesn't hide behind anyone. I'd rather have him than Snyder.

SmootSmack
10-30-2009, 01:56 PM
I think most owners in the NFL don't meddle. What I like about Jones is he at least doesn't hide behind anyone. I'd rather have him than Snyder.

Depends on how you define meddle. Most owners have various levels of involvement.

Would you be ok with Snyder's involvement if he just comes out and says "Moving forward, I am taking the title of General Manager"

Hog1
10-30-2009, 02:01 PM
I would think ALL owners meddle as that is part of the attraction of owning a team. As the article states....the ultimate fantasy football game? We just rarely hear about it. If the truth were known, who REALLY knows what DanFinger's involvement has been?

GMScud
10-30-2009, 02:14 PM
Depends on how you define meddle. Most owners have various levels of involvement.

Would you be ok with Snyder's involvement if he just comes out and says "Moving forward, I am taking the title of General Manager"

Not sure how heavily involved Snyder is with personnel, but one reason I can respect Jerry Jones is because he has the stones to call himself the GM of the team. He may not be very good at it, but at least he's not hiding behind a curtain pulling strings with no accountability.

BrunellMVP?
10-30-2009, 02:28 PM
Doesn't paint a bright picture for us...

I'd really just be happy if a football guy comes in that Dan respects (not one that he runs over like Vinny). I don't think that is asking too much

Lotus
10-30-2009, 02:41 PM
Depends on how you define meddle. Most owners have various levels of involvement.

Would you be ok with Snyder's involvement if he just comes out and says "Moving forward, I am taking the title of General Manager"

I would appreciate the honesty of such an announcement. That would beat an owner who acts as GM in secret.

I disagree with Tucker when he says, "If you were the owner of an NFL team, would you take a backseat and decline to have significant input on all of the football decisions? I didn't think so." At my job I have hired others who have expertise in fields that I don't. Even though I could get involved with their work, I don't at all - I let them be free to do their jobs as they see fit. After all, the reason they were hired is that they know things that I don't and from this point of view my meddling with their jobs would erase the reason for hiring them to begin with. Then again, I don't have $1 billion of mine on the line and we are not playing a game at my work. But I still think that the idea that owners inevitably will meddle holds no merit. In fact, projecting from my experience, the more an owner gets involved, the dumber he or she is.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha
10-30-2009, 02:56 PM
I realize that most owners are involved in matters affecting the teams. However, aren't many of the owners involved in an "advisory-only" role? I thought many GMs were granted, by the terms of their employment contracts, final authority on most decisions. The Danny hasn't ceded full control to someone else since 2001.

The Danny isn't the sole source of this team's struggles. However, he hired the coaches and is intimately involved in player acquisition matters. It's pretty hard not to blame him for a lot of our problems when he exercises that much power and has been around for the past 10 years.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum