Lion's Need GM and HC?

[Karnage84]

Just now, Superduperman said:

You're talking and talking defending the safe, milquetoast way of doing things, and then asking why the Lions don't just rip the band aid off with Quinn and Patricia right now? Can you not see how you are contradicting yourself?

Kyle Shanahan went 6-10 and then 4-12 before he took the 49ers to a 13-3 record and a Super Bowl appearance. 

Josh Rosen was selected #10 overall and then traded for a 2nd and 5th round pick. 

I'd rather allow my coaching staff enough time to fulfill their plans and see if it works or not. Patricia was given 3 off-seasons. The plan hasn't worked. So it's time to start moving forward in a different direction. Had the 49ers taken the same approach as what has been suggested (and I'm assuming you're in that group), Shanahan would've been fired and we wouldn't have seen them have the success they did last year. That would have been a mistake.

If we selected Tua or Herbert, there's no guarantee they would be repeating the level of success they're having with our staff and roster. Even if they did, what they do may or may not fit the system for a future HC. Not being able to bring in their own guy could be another detracting factor in a coach coming here. 2021 is considered to be a very very strong QB class. If the Lions had a good 2020 season, they would continue to build around Stafford and add more pieces to strengthen the run. If they had a poor 2020 season (which they have), this should put them in a position to draft a strong successor QB. Trading that 2020 QB asset for a Rosen-like return would have been a massive mistake. 

 

I'm talking and defending the reasonable and rational method of managing the circumstances knowing that 2020 was a make or break year for MP/BQ. If they failed (which they have) it would be a wholesale organizational change, which it will be. If you're going to do something, you have to commit to it and not be half in. Planning for a coaching change in 2021 at the beginning of the season and not doing everything to win this year without sacrificing the future is being half in. Keeping MP around at this point during a lost year is being half in.  

My final straw was the Colts game. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Really, I don't think Ron Wood has much to do with it anyway. He hired Quinn, which was the most impactful decision he had to make. I agreed with that decision.

If Quinn was better at drafting (especially in the 2nd round), if Stafford hadn't gotten hurt last year, and if Patricia was better at coaching, this team would have been vastly more successful over the past three years. Those things didn't happen. I don't blame those things on the Ford's, or even on Wood. I blame Quinn and Patricia.

[Sllim Pickens]

25 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Really, I don't think Ron Wood has much to do with it anyway. He hired Quinn, which was the most impactful decision he had to make. I agreed with that decision.

If Quinn was better at drafting (especially in the 2nd round), if Stafford hadn't gotten hurt last year, and if Patricia was better at coaching, this team would have been vastly more successful over the past three years. Those things didn't happen. I don't blame those things on the Ford's, or even on Wood. I blame Quinn and Patricia.

I get that but why was Quinn not better at drafting?  Does he have someone above him with NFL experience he can lean on?  As a young, brand new GM when he got here did he have the right support above him to be able to take on the role? Is he given enough resources to hire the right scouts, the number of scouts he wants, and dictate what he is looking for?  How much help was Wood in the process/decision making to let go of Caldwell and bring in Patricia without interviewing others?  Why was Wood not there to make sure he interviewed multiple candidates to make sure it was just a friendly hire?  Yes, directly the failures are on Patricia first for not coaching better and getting 11 men on the field.  Then it falls on Quin for not drafting/signing the right players, but then above that you have a guy who can't hire a GM or other football related staff without an external team telling him who to hire because he doesn't know what he s doing and he isnt involved.  

There are a lot of Ifs in all of this, but if there is not a tone at the top, that losing is not an option and we will do absolutely everything in our power to support you and get you what you need, it doesn't matter who you put in Quins position they will fail or have to be so amazing at their job to overcome that.  For business to work, and to get the most our of people from the president to the concessions guy, you need a leader who is visible, interested and enthusiastic.  We don't have that in the Ford's, we dont have that in Wood and it trickles down throughout the organization.  

 

[Superduperman]

If Martha had hired someone who had a football plan or football knowledge, he would have had a short list of manager candidates. He wouldn't have had to call Ernie Accorsi to tell him who to hire. Instead she hired the guy who ran the family tax write-off, who admitted in his opening press conference that he wasn't qualified to run an NFL team!

You've got your head in the sand.

[Sllim Pickens]

34 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

Kyle Shanahan went 6-10 and then 4-12 before he took the 49ers to a 13-3 record and a Super Bowl appearance. 

Josh Rosen was selected #10 overall and then traded for a 2nd and 5th round pick. 

I'd rather allow my coaching staff enough time to fulfill their plans and see if it works or not. Patricia was given 3 off-seasons. The plan hasn't worked. So it's time to start moving forward in a different direction. Had the 49ers taken the same approach as what has been suggested (and I'm assuming you're in that group), Shanahan would've been fired and we wouldn't have seen them have the success they did last year. That would have been a mistake.

 

The 49ers were in a different situation IMO, and were trending in the right direction.  They had just traded for their QB late in one season and then he was hurt in the second season.  Before that the 49ers were a talentless team scraping the bottom every year.  Patricia took over a playoff team and made us a bottom feeder again.  

Also, side note, Shanahan is an outlier.  If you look at 30 coaches that have failed miserably their first two years and then turned it around, you will find 1 maybe 2 people that were able to do it.  There are coaches that fail and then get another shot and then succeed after more seasoning.  But typically, history has shown that if a coach is not improving to .500 in year 2, he will likely not get there.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

2 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I get that but why was Quinn not better at drafting?  Does he have someone above him with NFL experience he can lean on?  As a young, brand new GM when he got here did he have the right support above him to be able to take on the role? Is he given enough resources to hire the right scouts, the number of scouts he wants, and dictate what he is looking for?  How much help was Wood in the process/decision making to let go of Caldwell and bring in Patricia without interviewing others?  Why was Wood not there to make sure he interviewed multiple candidates to make sure it was just a friendly hire?  Yes, directly the failures are on Patricia first for not coaching better and getting 11 men on the field.  Then it falls on Quin for not drafting/signing the right players, but then above that you have a guy who can't hire a GM or other football related staff without an external team telling him who to hire because he doesn't know what he s doing and he isnt involved.  

There are a lot of Ifs in all of this, but if there is not a tone at the top, that losing is not an option and we will do absolutely everything in our power to support you and get you what you need, it doesn't matter who you put in Quins position they will fail or have to be so amazing at their job to overcome that.  For business to work, and to get the most our of people from the president to the concessions guy, you need a leader who is visible, interested and enthusiastic.  We don't have that in the Ford's, we dont have that in Wood and it trickles down throughout the organization.  

Honestly, I've never heard such a defense of Quinn's struggles as a GM. If Quinn wasn't ready to draft players, after years of being involved in that process with NE, he shouldn't have been hired as a GM. Period. His draft failures are his and his alone.

[Sllim Pickens]

5 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Honestly, I've never heard such a defense of Quinn's struggles as a GM. If Quinn wasn't ready to draft players, after years of being involved in that process with NE, he shouldn't have been hired as a GM. Period. His draft failures are his and his alone.

I'm not defending him, I am saying we don't know all of the facts.  I want him gone, I think he has failed at his job.  I also think his boss has failed at his job because he now has had two GMs fail at their jobs.  That means he isnt doing something right as well.  Quin, was qualified, the outside agency told Wood so, but he has no idea how to help the GM be succesful, and it shows.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Just now, Sllim Pickens said:

I'm not defending him, I am saying we don't know all of the facts.  I want him gone, I think he has failed at his job.  I also think his boss has failed at his job because he now has had two GMs fail at their jobs.  That means he isnt doing something right as well.  Quin, was qualified, the outside agency told Wood so, but he has no idea how to help the GM be succesful, and it shows.  

It isn't Wood's job to help Quinn be a GM. We don't need a GM that needs help from above in making GM decisions. And I supported the Quinn hire. I thought it was the right move. It seems that I was wrong. That falls on Quinn and Patricia.

[Karnage84]

Just now, Sllim Pickens said:

The 49ers were in a different situation IMO, and were trending in the right direction.  They had just traded for their QB late in one season and then he was hurt in the second season.  Before that the 49ers were a talentless team scraping the bottom every year.  Patricia took over a playoff team and made us a bottom feeder again.  

Also, side note, Shanahan is an outlier.  If you look at 30 coaches that have failed miserably their first two years and then turned it around, you will find 1 maybe 2 people that were able to do it.  There are coaches that fail and then get another shot and then succeed after more seasoning.  But typically, history has shown that if a coach is not improving to .500 in year 2, he will likely not get there.  

Our franchise QB went down halfway through year 2. Based on the outcomes of the games he missed, we could have projected 8-10 wins with Stafford last year. It didn't actually happen but I can see where ownership made the decisions that they did in bringing them back this season. If the offense had played to the level that they were playing before Stafford was hurt and the defense was somewhere in the middle of the pack we could be on the road to a 12-4 or 13-3 type of turn around. Just because something happened this year that fits certain narratives and confirms a particular bias didn't mean it was inevitable or a foregone conclusion. 

The Niners had a boatload of high picks, especially on that defensive line. Disagree on the "talentless" note but I would say they were 'rudderless', which Shanahan helped turn around. 

 

[Sllim Pickens]

1 minute ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

It isn't Wood's job to help Quinn be a GM. We don't need a GM that needs help from above in making GM decisions. And I supported the Quinn hire. I thought it was the right move. It seems that I was wrong. That falls on Quinn and Patricia.

Every company has a hierarchy, and to be successful, all pieces need to be successful individually.  For a player to succeed, he needs other players around him to succeed, and a coach to succeed.  For every coach he needs a GM to succeed in getting him players.  And every GM needs the support and resources and guidance from their boss to succeed.  Thats just simple business/corporate structure.  It applies to any business you have and unless Quinn was the top ma on that chart, he needs those above him to succeed.  

[Sllim Pickens]

5 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

Our franchise QB went down halfway through year 2. Based on the outcomes of the games he missed, we could have projected 8-10 wins with Stafford last year. It didn't actually happen but I can see where ownership made the decisions that they did in bringing them back this season. If the offense had played to the level that they were playing before Stafford was hurt and the defense was somewhere in the middle of the pack we could be on the road to a 12-4 or 13-3 type of turn around. Just because something happened this year that fits certain narratives and confirms a particular bias didn't mean it was inevitable or a foregone conclusion. 

The Niners had a boatload of high picks, especially on that defensive line. Disagree on the "talentless" note but I would say they were 'rudderless', which Shanahan helped turn around. 

 

The boatload of picks on that D line were the last two drafts prior to last year.  That team Shanahan took over was a 2 win team.  Their top WRs were Jeremy Kerley and Quinton Patton.  Their LBs and corners were trash having recently lost Bowman.  They lacked a lot of talent.  Garrapolo, Kittle, all of their WRs, all of their RBs, half of their O line, and all but Buckner and Armstead are new on D (and Armstead was a bust until last year).  They lacked talent.  Were not coming off a 9 win season and playoff birth.  Yes last year was a lot of Stafford but we were under .500 with Stafford.  Which again coming into a 9 win team is not good enough.  

[diehardlionfan]

2 hours ago, Superduperman said:

This is where people come close to understanding the Ford family’s rationale in running the Lions, but don’t quite get there.

After observing this team for 45 years, and rooting for them for 30, and racking my brain like we all do why they never succeed, I figured it out. I solved the riddle of the Lions.

I don’t have time to write out my full thoughts on this, because I’d have to write a long-form essay which you don’t all want to read. I may do it someday, but I’m convinced I have ironclad reasoning.

Because I can’t lay it all out, some of you might scoff at this, especially one certain Lions apologist in this thread. It sounds kind of far fetched because it’s so obvious, and so simple, yet so much worse than we want to admit when you think about it.

Here it is, ready? The answer to the riddle is:

The Detroit Lions are not a football organization.

They have a football team, they employ football players and coaches and execs, but they do not exist to succeed at football. They do not exist to be judged by wins and losses.

They don’t even exist to make money as a football team! Sure, their franchise is worth exponentially more than WCF paid for it, but they’re second to last in terms of value. I haven’t seen current figures in a few years, but last I heard they were at the bottom of the league in revenue and profit too. This is where the “Fords just want to make money” arguments are wrong - but close.

For the real answer, I want you to consider this: The Ford Motor Company has an annual operating income of 20 to 30 billion dollars. Sales of 150 billion. Their annual advertising budget was 2.2 billion in 2019 - more than the value of the Lions franchise!

Even the Ford Foundation, the family tax write-off, has assets of 14 billion dollars. The fact that they put the director of it in charge of the Lions should tell you all you need to know. That and the “Ford Halftime Show.”

The Lions as a football team are insignificant to the Ford family as a primary moneymaking endeavor. Their ability to win football games is even less significant. They exist only to provide the Ford family and the Ford Motor Company with corporate, community, and nationwide prestige.

Would the Fords like the Lions to win? Sure they would, in the same way that I’d like a million dollars. If someone hands it to them, they will smile and take it. But developing a football team that earns it is not in their list of priorities, at least not high enough to do the work it takes. And it never will be because that’s not the primary reason they own the team. And if you think that doesn't affect everyone from the team president to the third string special team gunner, well I'm sorry but you're just wrong. 

The Fords ownership of the Lions has always been about the money. The Lions are the Ford families number 1 asset. Bill Ford Jr. during his time  at Ford made huge $$$$ off bonuses and stock options but the rest of the family survives by selling their stock. The largest shareholder of the Ford family stock is a cousin of Ford Jr. 

The family (all branches) own 2% of Ford stock worth slightly over 1 billion (ownership of the class B shares includes 10 or so cousins)They retain control via a share class system that should be illegal. The majority of the shares are in a trust used as a voting block. Any family member selling their private Ford holdings have to be offered to family members first in a tight if first refusal arrangement.

The foundation has wealth but it doesn’t have any value to the Fords. It was originally created to allow the Ford family to retain control  of Ford Motor Company. Much of its wealth was created by selling its Ford class A shares. The Ford family has no control over the foundation. William Ford III is a director but his influence is one vote. The Ford (I forget which one) resigned from the trust because of his view that it had morphed into an anti capitalist force as it bequeathed more money to left of centre organizations. 

I totally disagree about your remarks that the Lions are insignificant. It’s their number 1 asset so suggesting it’s insignificant is wrong. 

William Clay Fords immediate descendants have a combined net worth of 2 Billion. Martha Firestone Ford owns the Lions and has a net worth of 800 million making her wealthier than only Mark Davis amongst owners. 

So I agree the focus isn’t about winning but I disagree with the team being insignificant.

[LionArkie]

I know this isn't the main point, but I'm just sitting here thinking every NFL team is a status symbol to every NFL owner.  They all had their riches long before they purchased their teams.

[Sllim Pickens]

33 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

I know this isn't the main point, but I'm just sitting here thinking every NFL team is a status symbol to every NFL owner.  They all had their riches long before they purchased their teams.

Agreed, but some stop there, others treat it and run it like a business.  Some treat it and run it like a hobby.  And the Fords have always seem to use this as a hobby. 

[Superduperman]

1 hour ago, LionArkie said:

I know this isn't the main point, but I'm just sitting here thinking every NFL team is a status symbol to every NFL owner.  They all had their riches long before they purchased their teams.

For most of them, winning is the status symbol. For the Fords, it's just part of the investment portfolio. They're like Donald Sterling minus the overt racism.