Lion's Need GM and HC?

[Karnage84]

There have been some really good posts and some valid points on some of the other franchises. However, the fact of the matter is that the Fords have not announced any plans or indication that they will sell the team. Debating the validity of ownership and whether a change in ownership would or wouldn't have any impact is really irrelevant. They are going to be a part of the long term future. 

There aren't a lot of options: Either someone comes in and figures out how to win with the current ownership structure, someone else comes in and fails (lather, rinse, repeat) or we all pick another team without the same history. 

I'm not suggesting (as some will incorrectly label me with this) we should be accepting of inadequacy. However, we have to be accepting of the bare facts and operate within those facts. If/when the Lions find success, the Fords will be a part of that formula, barring anything unforeseen. 

 

[Sllim Pickens]

3 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

There have been some really good posts and some valid points on some of the other franchises. However, the fact of the matter is that the Fords have not announced any plans or indication that they will sell the team. Debating the validity of ownership and whether a change in ownership would or wouldn't have any impact is really irrelevant. They are going to be a part of the long term future. 

There aren't a lot of options: Either someone comes in and figures out how to win with the current ownership structure, someone else comes in and fails (lather, rinse, repeat) or we all pick another team without the same history. 

I'm not suggesting (as some will incorrectly label me with this) we should be accepting of inadequacy. However, we have to be accepting of the bare facts and operate within those facts. If/when the Lions find success, the Fords will be a part of that formula, barring anything unforeseen. 

 

I get that, and its afair point but this is a discussion board.  I am not discussing if they are going to sell or not, just discussing their role in the failures as an organization.  Its not to take away from the failures in coaching or drafting or playing, but to point out that the failures go far beyond just what we see on the field.  And that can and does seem to make a difference. 

[Karnage84]

Just now, Sllim Pickens said:

I get that, and its afair point but this is a discussion board.  I am not discussing if they are going to sell or not, just discussing their role in the failures as an organization.  Its not to take away from the failures in coaching or drafting or playing, but to point out that the failures go far beyond just what we see on the field.  And that can and does seem to make a difference. 

Which is why I do appreciate the points that you and others have made. I don't discount the validity of those points. Anyone in a leadership position should be the first person to take accountability for an organizations failures and be the last person to accept sole praise for success. 

It just seems like we're in circular arguments leading to nowhere. 

Sheila Ford Hamp is a fixture in the organizational structure. Rod Wood, Bob Quinn and Matt Patricia are the variables. Changing out one or all of these variable parts is either going to increase success, reduce success (not much more room to go down) or be a lateral move with equal amounts of success. 

There were some arguments about Rod Wood and his impact on the organization. Who could replace him and what would they bring to the organization that is different than what we're getting from Rod Wood?

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Yeah, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'll never be convinced that selling the team to Robert Kraft would make us successful. I'll never be convinced that having the Fords as owners, with the best roster and best coaches in the NFL, would lead to anything but success.

If Quinn was a great GM, and Patricia a great coach, we'd be a great team. Period. If both disappoint, so will the team. If we hire a great GM and coach, we'll be successful, regardless of which name or family owns this team. The Patriots had a dynasty because they had an incredible GM/coach and quarterback. Robert Kraft's impact on that team pales significantly in comparison.

Good GMs, good coaches and good players win games. Period.

[Sllim Pickens]

50 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Yeah, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'll never be convinced that selling the team to Robert Kraft would make us successful. I'll never be convinced that having the Fords as owners, with the best roster and best coaches in the NFL, would lead to anything but success.

If Quinn was a great GM, and Patricia a great coach, we'd be a great team. Period. If both disappoint, so will the team. If we hire a great GM and coach, we'll be successful, regardless of which name or family owns this team. The Patriots had a dynasty because they had an incredible GM/coach and quarterback. Robert Kraft's impact on that team pales significantly in comparison.

Good GMs, good coaches and good players win games. Period.

So do you just think the Lions are unlucky to have never had the right coach GM, players etc since the 50s?  Do you feel like the Clippers were unlucky under Sterling and now their luck just has changed under Ballmer and the ownership change had nothing to do with it?  Do you think Bill Cowher and Mike Tomlin would have been the only two coaches in 40 years if they were in Detroit?

Yes good players and coaches lead to winning.  Good upper management and leadership lead to good hires of coaches and GMs.  Good upper management attracts better talent below them.  Good upper management and culture lead to the team doing well from top to bottom.  The evidence is there, good owners have turned around organizations.  I can't buy that we just have had crap luck and hired crap staff for 70 years as just being an unlucky coincidence.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

48 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

So do you just think the Lions are unlucky to have never had the right coach GM, players etc since the 50s?  Do you feel like the Clippers were unlucky under Sterling and now their luck just has changed under Ballmer and the ownership change had nothing to do with it?  Do you think Bill Cowher and Mike Tomlin would have been the only two coaches in 40 years if they were in Detroit?

Yes good players and coaches lead to winning.  Good upper management and leadership lead to good hires of coaches and GMs.  Good upper management attracts better talent below them.  Good upper management and culture lead to the team doing well from top to bottom.  The evidence is there, good owners have turned around organizations.  I can't buy that we just have had crap luck and hired crap staff for 70 years as just being an unlucky coincidence.  

I think that winning in the NFL is hard. After 11 sasons, the Packers have won only one Super Bowl with one of the best QBs in the NFL. It's just not easy to win.

When I can point to glaring mistakes or shortcomings by the players, coaches and GM, I won't blame the owner. If the players, coaches and GM did their jobs at a high level, we would be successful.

[Nnivolcm]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I think that winning in the NFL is hard. After 11 sasons, the Packers have won only one Super Bowl with one of the best QBs in the NFL. It's just not easy to win.

When I can point to glaring mistakes or shortcomings by the players, coaches and GM, I won't blame the owner. If the players, coaches and GM did their jobs at a high level, we would be successful.

I pretty much agree with what @Sllim Pickens has said today. I just think it's funny you're using a team with a Superbowl win in 11 years as your argument that a team with one playoff win in the Superbowl era doesn't have an ownership issue. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 hour ago, Nnivolcm said:

I pretty much agree with what @Sllim Pickens has said today. I just think it's funny you're using a team with a Superbowl win in 11 years as your argument that a team with one playoff win in the Superbowl era doesn't have an ownership issue. 

Nope. That wasn't my argument at all.

[Lions017]

15 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

Yes, but its the process of getting more talented.  They weren't always more talented but seemed to always win the East and advance in the playoffs.  Yes there are talent disparities on current rosters, but look how those teams have functioned over various GMs, various coaches, etc.  They plug and play on the field and at the coordinator positions.  Thats possible due to strong leadership at the top. 

That's what I meant when I was talking about talent - not so much about the players, more about the leadership, coach, and GM. Those guys are just a hell of a lot better than Quinn and Patricia, and they're the ones making decisions. 

[Sllim Pickens]

16 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I think that winning in the NFL is hard. After 11 sasons, the Packers have won only one Super Bowl with one of the best QBs in the NFL. It's just not easy to win.

When I can point to glaring mistakes or shortcomings by the players, coaches and GM, I won't blame the owner. If the players, coaches and GM did their jobs at a high level, we would be successful.

I'm not even just talking Super Bowls though.  Good organizations may not win it every year but they are competitive and don't have extended dips.  You don't just luck into Super Bowls, you build the foundation of being a successful organization and give yourself an opportunity to win each year.  Which the Lions have never done.  The foundation is being rebuilt every 5 years because those at the top have put no effort into that foundation.  

[Sllim Pickens]

3 hours ago, Lions017 said:

That's what I meant when I was talking about talent - not so much about the players, more about the leadership, coach, and GM. Those guys are just a hell of a lot better than Quinn and Patricia, and they're the ones making decisions. 

I am talking above that.  The coach and GM need the support from the president and the owner.  It all works together.  If you keep firing people because they fail, maybe its on you.  If you have minimal hires year over year, people want to be there, its probably because you have a good base to the organization.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

3 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I am talking above that.  The coach and GM need the support from the president and the owner.  It all works together.  If you keep firing people because they fail, maybe its on you.  If you have minimal hires year over year, people want to be there, its probably because you have a good base to the organization.  

Does Quinn have the support of the Ford family?

How do fans that demand GMs and coaches be fired every 2-3 years criticize the owner for firing GMs and coaches?

[Sllim Pickens]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Does Quinn have the support of the Ford family?

How do fans that demand GMs and coaches be fired every 2-3 years criticize the owner for firing GMs and coaches?

I don't know if the Fords support Quin, but I also don't think they know enough to make a decision either way.  

I call for people who fail at their job to be fired.  I think Quin has failed at his job.  I also think the Fords are failing as owners.  I wish they would sell so someone who is competnant and driven to win would be here to hire the next GM/President etc.  The blame doesn thave to be all here or all there.  Its a mixed bag but I know after seeing GM after GM fail with coach after coach and president after president, that blame has to be put on those at the top for the overall failure as an organization.  

[Karnage84]

16 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I don't know if the Fords support Quin, but I also don't think they know enough to make a decision either way.  

I call for people who fail at their job to be fired.  I think Quin has failed at his job.  I also think the Fords are failing as owners.  I wish they would sell so someone who is competnant and driven to win would be here to hire the next GM/President etc.  The blame doesn thave to be all here or all there.  Its a mixed bag but I know after seeing GM after GM fail with coach after coach and president after president, that blame has to be put on those at the top for the overall failure as an organization.  

We are under new ownership with Sheila Ford Hamp. While she has been working with her mother, it is her show to run now. We'll see if it is more of the same, similar with a different flavour or something new altogether. 

[LionArkie]

1 hour ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I don't know if the Fords support Quin, but I also don't think they know enough to make a decision either way.  

I call for people who fail at their job to be fired.  I think Quin has failed at his job.  I also think the Fords are failing as owners.  I wish they would sell so someone who is competnant and driven to win would be here to hire the next GM/President etc.  The blame doesn thave to be all here or all there.  Its a mixed bag but I know after seeing GM after GM fail with coach after coach and president after president, that blame has to be put on those at the top for the overall failure as an organization.  

Just out of curiosity, if the Ford's were to sell to another owner and that owner moved the team to a new city would you still be happy with the sale of the team?