I think the Raiders would be the most attractive, or I should say least awful of those listings. Though that team needs a total rebuild, and you have to get along with Tom Brady probably. Whoever gets hired there will probably be someone with a previous relationship with Tom.
The Cardinals… I don’t know what they have going for them. Unlike the Raiders, I don’t think they have been bad enough to make a total rebuild palatable (though it’s probably necessary now) and playing in the same division as LA, San Francisco, and Seattle is going to be rough for anyone. I’m not saying the AFC West is much easier (despite the Chiefs being an uncharacteristic punching bag this year), but the NFC West is just especially difficult.
I think any HC who takes over the Browns should understand it’s going to be a temporary gig because that’s a team that can’t even rebuild right now. That job is a seat-warmer.
I think it’s great to reward loyalty and promote from within, but it seems weird in this case with the McDermott firing. How different is it going to be with Brady in charge?
They have been a dysfunctional organization since Al Davis got older and progressively stranger, and have been even worse under Mark Davis. Brady has essentially bought his way into being a de facto member of the team’s senior management, with zero prior experience at any level of team administration, and we have zero idea if he is actually any good at it…but bringing him in because he’s Tom Frickin’ Brady is such a very Raiders thing to do.
His college roommate is their GM. Not that it necessarily makes his former roommate a bad GM or not truly an independent decision maker, but in terms of red flags…
Well, however you feel about Tom Brady and his annoying, over-eager voice as a broadcaster, he does know about football. If the Raiders’ leadership allow him to make football decisions it’s likely to be positive. That will require Marky to settle down and just enjoy the game from the luxury box, and not interfere with player and coaching decisions - just write the checks and keep smiling and don’t say anything.
From the management side of things: he has zero experience at it. We have no idea if he actually “knows about” running a franchise, but giving a guy that sort of leadership power with no track record has a high likelihood of being a train wreck.
Remember upthread, four or five days ago, when we were talking about Philip Rivers? It’s not that different. IMO.
Brady might know about the Xs and Os. But so did Belichick, and he was not a great evaluator of player talent, and his coaching tree isn’t all that great. John Elway might be the most successful example of former QB turned GM (John Lynch might be a better example among players in general), and even that was rough at times.
But granted, it’s not the worst basis on which Mark Davis could choose to trust somebody.
Agree. I did not speculate on how positive he may be, but even with his inexperience, it’s more possible to have a positive difference than leaving things as they are, and continuing season after season of mediocrity or worse.
At least in Buffalo they have a functional management structure.
I’m not accusing you of this, but it feels like there’s been a lot of revisionist history about Belichick, especially after Brady left for Tampa Bay, where he won a Super Bowl; there had been a lot of debates about “was it Brady, or Belichick, who really won all of those Super Bowls,” and I feel like the consensus is now that it was Brady. (Belichick’s move to UNC, and his 20-something girlfriend, likely don’t help how he’s currently seen.)
While I don’t think that Belichick would have been as successful without Brady, I also think that Brady would not have been successful without Belichick. And, I’ll disagree about Belichick and personnel decisions: he identified and nurtured a number of guys who weren’t superstars, but were great fits for his system – guys like Vrabel, Welker, Edelmen, etc. His legacy won’t be a lot of Hall of Famers, despite all the rings, but he was very good at getting the right guys for his team.
I mostly agree with most of that, though I think Belichick gets most of the credit for those first 3 Super Bowls (stout defense and great run game took you far back then) while Brady probably gets more for the last 3.
But I think it’s worth nothing that most players and coaches aren’t static. I think Belichick was relatively good at the player evaluation and finding players earlier in his career and in keeping draft picks and contracts in line. But never really adjusted to the new CBA reality in the back half of his career. But was good at the coaching part throughout - he cobbled some surprising wins together from some mediocre to bad teams in those post Brady years.
Basically, he was good but definitely lost a step, at least on the personnel side.
Time will tell if Brady even has a step, at least in evaluating coaching hires and advising teams on players.
Agreed. Belichick was the last significant example of a guy who held both the head coach and GM roles; most teams had realized that both jobs had become enormous (and different), and it was essentially impossible for one person to perform well in both roles.
As you note, the complexities of the GM role have become even greater in the last 10-15 years, and he was probably out of his depth in the role by the end.
Elway took over as GM in 2011, and his first team made the playoffs with an 8-8 record (with Tim Tebow as QB), and then Elway hit a home run by drafting Von Miller. In the offseason, he signed free-agent Peyton Manning, who took the team to 4 straight playoffs, and 2 Super Bowls, winning one. But after Manning retired, Elway’s teams were terrible. They missed the playoffs for five straight years, after which Elway relinquished the GM position.
His quarterback drafts included Brock Osweiler, Trevor Siemian, Paxton Lynch, and Drew Lock. Overall, Elway’s teams were 90-98. And without FA Manning, his record would undoubtedly be far worse.
I’m not saying he was a sterling example of a GM, but has any QB turned GM done any better? I mean in the modern era, of course, not back when a player could also be owner/coach/GM at the same time.
So, I agree with you but all the same, Elway is the one to beat as QB turned GM. Players turned successful GMs or executive are pretty rare in general, though. John Lynch is the only one that springs to mind as actually being good at it over the last 30 or 40 years.
That’s why I do wonder how good Tom Brady might end up being at the role and what Mark Davis might have been thinking.
Sources are indicating that he was told last week that he was not elected into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility; voters for the Hall had met to vote two weeks ago. It appears to be politics: possibly some voters wanting him to have to wait a year due to Spygate and Deflategate, as well as the fact that Belichick and Patriots owner Robert Kraft (with whom he has long had a strained relationship) are both on the “coaches & contributors” slate this year.
Front office considerations notwithstanding, the Raiders aren’t a terrible job for someone. They have Ashton Jeanty, Brock Bowers, the #1 overall pick, and $100 million in cap space. Arizona only has $21M in cap space, and Cleveland is actually $12M over. And it’s not like the Browns and Cards don’t have their own front office/ownership issues.
That’s what I meant. You get a chance to do an actual rebuild over there. And let’s not forget that they have the #1 overall pick. I don’t know if a head coach will have any say in what that pick is, but maybe. That seems like a way to entice someone to take the job.
(But we all know it’s going to be Mendoza. I think we do anyway.)
Clearly they have problems with their ownership, there are front office problems. They are dysfunctional; that’s why they haven’t had success in a long time. I still think it might be more attractive than the other two openings.
I’d rank them (and I’m not even saying “best” because they all suck); Raiders least bad, Cardinals worse, and Browns the absolute worst.