Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogtag
George asked the tough question ... great job George.
. . . .
Not to get off on a tangent, but I keep hearing fans say that we have personnel issues (scouting/recruitment, evaluation, best value analysis, trade-off analysis, character, business case analysis/cost, intangibles) and the conclusion is generally that the Redskins need a General Manager (GM). It sounds to me like the Redskins need help with Human Resources (that handle those personnel issues) and not a General Manager that handles all Administrative Efforts (of which Personnel is usually only a lesser part of the duties). In the NFL, is a GM considered a Human Resources job?
|
Well put!
In most teams the GM also negotiates the player contracts, so he evaluates a potential player's worth to the team. Supposedly, an independent GM would have balanced Gregg W's desire for Arch against Arch's comparison to other safeties. For a $10 bonus, maybe there were better safeties out there, or better ways to build the roster.
Another example, maybe the Skins give up two draft picks in trade for BLloyd, but a GM might not have signed him to a new contract until his old one expired at the end of this year. Skins would have a lot more flexibility if Lloyd were a free agent playing out his contract this season. As things stand now, Washington has a big cap hit if they dump Lloyd.