It's certainly possible that Manning's health deteriorates next year, or something else happens, which is true of every player. But if Denver wins the Super Bowl then it will have been worth it. That was always my main point in the Manning debate, that the potential reward well outweighed the risk. And I wasn't even really referring to you in my previous post as you just didn't like the risk/reward analysis. Many people claimed to be medical experts and declared with extreme confidence that Manning would never play again
I think this is the first time I've used those words in this thread, but how else should I describe them? Many people doubted Manning and claimed that medically he could not play anymore. I don't think "doubter" is a pejorative and it wasn't meant for you anyway, but if you took offense it wasn't my intent and I apologize
Sure, but what if Ireland wasn't responsible for the Henne pick, and he's only now getting his first crack at running a team with his own QB? As much as success is contingent on quarterback play, I don't think you can hold a team's won-loss record against a guy who's (perhaps) never been given a chance to run things with his own quarterback. Then there's also the issue of the head coach. Should we hold Tony Sparano's years against Jeff Ireland if Jeff Ireland wasn't responsible for hiring him? My lord, it could be entirely the case that Jeff Ireland has really never been given the chance to run the team while being in control of the two positions that stand to influence its success the most! Imagine the helplessness you'd feel if you were the GM of an NFL team and you had to sit there in the press box week after week, watching the team be run at the two most important levels below you (HC and QB) by people you didn't select! And then imagine being fired after they performed poorly! This is why it's important to evaluate the rest of the roster right now, and see how it's doing independent of the effect of a rookie QB, because it may really be the only way of evaluating the performance of Jeff Ireland for which he's actually been at least somewhat responsible. Next year we can evaluate Tannehill as well, but I think perhaps the only clean way to get a read on what Jeff Ireland's done at this point, for things for which we can at least semi-safely say he's been responsible, is by somehow evaluating the roster independent of the effect of its present rookie QB.
I've defended him since he arrived. I defended him this offseason when every one was firing him. It looked good when we were winning but now the chickens have come home to roost. When can I change my mind on him? Is there a threshold? Is it a 5 game losing streak? 7? How many losing seasons should I give him? 3? 4? This is his team and it has holes everywhere. This offseason is too important to trust him in my opinion.
Your last line is how I feel. We still have holes all over the roster , and sure some say wait ,be patient , it takes time , so when is judgement day then? I would have made the change last year with the coaching change. I did however like this draft , and did say Ireland had this year to have HIS players and HIS team show and perform well enough to see if he warranted being retained. Some think he has , some though Sparano should be retained after the Harbaugh fiasco too.
Sparano should have been fired before Ross went after Harbaugh. I also stand by the fact that the "lame duck" coach doesn't exist.
Those are a lot of what-ifs that are raised mostly out of convenience. Everyone likes to attribute all of the bad stuff to Bill Parcells and the good stuff to Jeff Ireland. The reality is Parcells made a few calls at the beginning of things, but Jeff Ireland was complicit in all but one or two of all of the transactions that have happened since he joined the Miami Dolphins. Any GM could at any point be overruled by their owner. Does that mean no GM in the league can be graded, based on "what if"? Jeff Ireland signed on knowing full well that Tony Sparano was the likely hire. So you can't sit here and say Jeff Ireland had nothing to do with that. And all evidence has pointed to Jeff Ireland being far more on board with the Jake Long pick than even Bill Parcells. And as for Chad Henne, Jeff Ireland is the guy who literally declared him a successful draft pick after only one year. So this picture you paint of Jeff Ireland being forced to sit in the corner and watch as the team is run without his input or say-so, is not only a figment of imagination formed out of pure convenience, it has about a 0% chance of relevance. The entire time he's been here, Jeff Ireland has had final say authority written into his contract. At any point he could have raised a grievance if he was not allowed to exercise that authority. So if he really did just sit in the corner and twiddle his thumbs while Parcells made a bunch of moves that Ireland disagreed with, then he's a big fat *****. And I don't think anyone likes the idea of a big fat ***** running a football team. Jeff Ireland has been the General Manager of the Miami Dolphins, with final say authority written into his contract, for five years. Even if you're in love with this idea that Ireland willingly let his boss tromp all over him even though it was within his contractual, legal rights to stand up for himself, you still have to come to grips with the myriad evidence and quotes that have been offered that say that Jeff Ireland essentially agreed with every move that happened with the exception of only one or two. And though people will conveniently want to pick out the worstest most awfulest decisions that have been made and pretend that it's very likely that those are the one or two decisions Ireland disagreed with, reality says it's just as likely that those decisions he disagreed with were ones that ended up good decisions and he was wrong for disagreeing.
I find it hard to believe that the reality of the situation was that Jeff Ireland was at fault for the Sparano/Henne years if Stephen Ross was advised by Carl Peterson, a guy who knows how NFL teams run, regarding the situation and whom to keep going forward, and Jeff Ireland was kept. I think the parsimonious explanation is that Carl Peterson surveyed the situation and came away thinking Ireland was in an "apprentice" mode with Parcells, that Parcells was responsible for the Sparano and Henne mistakes, and that Jeff Ireland should be given his chance as an unencumbered GM going forward, making his own decisions and living and dying by them.
You're assuming Carl Peterson has had a heavy day to day involvement in football operations and I just don't see any evidence of that. I think he's been there to freely offer Steve Ross advice, but that's it. And we already know of at least one other completely unaffiliated league known personality that has been there for Steve Ross in terms of advice giving, so that role is not exactly a unique one for Peterson. Plus I don't think it would be an exaggeration to say that in his last few years with the Dolphins, Bill Parcells considered it his main job to keep Carl Peterson out of football operations and we did hear lots of reports that Parcells said if he caught Peterson anywhere near the building then he'd bolt (which he did anyway). Plus I don't know why it's supposed to be impressive if Carl Peterson gave his former employee his blessing to remain the GM. I get the feeling that there isn't a lot of detail or paper trail out there period, anywhere, even in the organization, discriminating between what was a Parcells decision and what was an Ireland decision, because the two worked so closely and collaboratively. That's why I don't buy this BS about everything being a Parcells decision or Ireland being "encumbered". It was a collaborative process and Jeff Ireland allowed Bill Parcells to have some of "his" guys just as Bill Parcells allowed Jeff Ireland to have some of "his" guys and the two were complicit with each other on every single move save for "one or two" that have been cited by someone that speaks directly with Ireland about such things. And that relationship by the way is really not a whole lot different from the relationship between a GM and his Personnel Directors and Scouts. It's always a consensus building operation and every GM out there throws the various personnel people under them a bone every now and again by giving them one or two of "their" guys. Does that mean that no GM can be evaluated because you can't pick out which instances were what? Ted Thompson can't be evaluated because you don't know whether Jordy Nelson was one of "his" or if he was one of Reggie McKenzie's or if he was one of John Dorsey's? The reality is, you're the General Manager, you have the final say in your contract, the plaque on the office door...you're evaluated on all of it because you could have prevented any of it. Any. Of. It.
I don't think there needed to be any paper trail. I think the players involved -- Ross, Parcells, and Ireland -- were probably well aware of how the power was distributed and whom had been responsible for what, and at the point the whole thing needed to be evaluated and Peterson was consulted, it was simply a matter of Ross's communicating to Peterson how things went down, with Peterson providing his insight about how things should best take shape going forward. If you think about Bill Parcells's personality and Jeff Ireland's level of experience as a GM when Parcells was first hired, I think the safe bet is on Ireland's having been an "apprentice" at that point, with the major decisions -- most notably Tony Sparano and Jake Long -- being left for Parcells. I mean certainly we don't think Jeff Ireland hired Tony Sparano? And if Jeff Ireland didn't hire Tony Sparano, do you really think he was responsible for Jake Long? Think about how Parcells liked his teams built, think about the kind of player Jake Long is, and think about how Bill Parcells had already been the one who made the decision on the head coach. I don't think this is really all that twisted around in any way. Jeff Ireland may have had this or that written into his contract, but if that's not the way things actually happened in practice, in reality, then surely he can't be evaluated on those grounds. In the end Jeff Ireland was a first-time GM who had just been hired by a football legend who had total power over the football personnel in the organization. He wasn't in any position to overrule that person, regardless of what was in his contract.
I think there's points for both sides of this argument, and from a fan looking from the outside, I'm not sure where the conviction comes from for either side..
Jeff Ireland was hired knowing full well Tony Sparano was going to be his guy. If he didn't want Tony Sparano he could have made Jerry Jones a happy man and said no. That was his choice. And absolutely Jeff Ireland got his wish on Jake Long. I'm 150% certain of that. It was Bill Parcells who was more torn on the question of Jake Long or Matt Ryan because his PREVIOUS advice had always been (and was, when he gave advice to a departing Sean Payton) to go out and get your franchise quarterback. I've spoken with a member of the media who has spoken with Parcells and knows for a fact that Parcells was kept awake at night on the Long/Ryan decision. And long afterward, after he'd left the team, there was a very public incident where Parcells suggested that he may have made the wrong choice. Within 24 hours Jeff Ireland (who never speaks to the media) got in front of the media and said taking Jake Long over Matt Ryan was not in any way a mistake and it's a choice he'd make every time. Just like right after drafting Jake Long he said that Jake was his #1 player on the board for "a long time" (since prior to joining the Dolphins). Just like when a member of the media suggested that drafting Jon Martin could be insurance in case they let Jake Long go, Jeff Ireland once again did what he never does, got out in front of the media, and led in with a statement specifically refuting that report. To call him "sensitive" on that subject would be an understatement. There has never been any indication whatsoever that Matt Ryan was even in Jeff Ireland's crosshairs, but there have been tons of indications that Matt Ryan was in Bill Parcells' crosshairs. I'm sorry but people can talk about that one all they want. I know what I know. LMAO at "this or that". Right. So legal contractually binding language being written into your contract is "this or that", and what does that stuff really MATTER any way? I mean it's not like anyone ever really enforces that stuff. Oh, wait...
This contractual argument is nonsense. It is pretty clear that that "final say" language was put in there so that Ireland could come over from the Cowboys. For all practical purposes it is unenforceable. Why? Because once the contract has been breached and the team takes someone other than who Ireland would have taken, it is really too late to do anything about it. The pick can't be undone. Ireland wouldn't have been personally damaged in any significant monetary way, so there'd be no big damages award to him. If he tried to enforce it, it would create a big public stink and controversy that would be bad for everyone, Ireland included. And even if he went ahead and did bring a claim, it would undoubtedly result in him getting fired. Sure, there's a pretty good chance he'd be able to collect the salary for the remaining years on the contract, but when has that stopped a team from firing a GM (or coach)? Half a dozen or more teams every year fire their GMs and eat the remainder of their contracts. And after all that, Ireland probably would have been essentially blackballed by the other teams because he's be recognized as a ****-disturbing prima donna. Of course, there's no reason to think that Ireland so vociferously disagreed with anything that happened when Parcells was here to even consider going down that path . . . So yeah, it is like nobody ever enforces that stuff. When has a GM ever enforced a "final say" provision, or any other control provision, in his contract?
Let's assume that Ireland didn't have final say or attempt to exercise said final say, even though it's been pointed out that he had a legal, contractually binding right to do so; Is there a precedent for this? I mean, you look at the situation in Cleveland, where Mike Holmgren brought along Tom Heckert as his GM. Now that Holmgren is gone, Heckert is so sure he's going to be out at year's end that he's already told friends and colleagues as much. Heckert's only been in Cleveland since 2010, while Ireland's been here since 2008. I wonder if fans of the Browns are having the same debate we are. My guess is probably not.
If true, you're suggesting that Ireland either knowingly accepted a "puppet role", or he was lied to.
No, it's not a puppet role. I suspect he knew full well that Parcells was his boss and that, in practice, Parcells would be making the final call for the first few years. That is certainly what 99.99999999999999% of the human population believed at the time and I suspect Ireland was no different. I suspect he also knew or believed that Parcells wouldn't stay here much longer than a few years and that when Parcells left he would have true final say, which was more than he would ever have been able to get in Dallas where Jerry Jones will never give up control. In order for Ireland to be able to take the job here it had to be a promotion, which necessitated the "final say" provision in the contract even though it is likely that everyone knew that it meant nothing in a practical sense.
It's not a puppet role yet he shouldn't be held responsible for anything that happened...?? I guess I'm having a hard time following this logic. Jeff Ireland still has a boss, Stephen Ross. Should we go ahead and hold Ross accountable for bad moves now? None of us can confirm that they weren't Ross's ideas.
I guess my point is that Ireland had a lot more say than people think. I too suspect he knew what he was getting himself into. Regardless of my opinion on his ability to build a competent football team, he's not a dumb guy. The two main reasons people had for defending Ireland were that 1) He didn't have full autonomy while Parcells was here and 2) We should compare his record/draft success (or lack therof) to other GM's. I discount the second reason because, let's face it, if you're mediocre you're mediocre. It doesn't matter if other GM's are as well. Chances are anyone with his career record wouldn't be around long anyway either. To the first reason, if what we're speculating is true and he was more than just a puppet, then he's just as to blame as Parcells was for the teams record over the last 5 years, if not moreso given that he's been on his own completely for the last 2.
IMO it's difficult to measure draft success for a gm especially for a sub-par team. I mean, if a success is considered drafting a starter, who's to say that player starts for a successful team?
He should have been , he should never have been hired to be blunt , but after the Harbaugh debacle , there was such a disconnect that it made the decision to extend him and give him a raise and more input into personnel decisions a terribly bad joke. Unfortunately as Miami fans we have become accustomed to poor decisions.
I do not agree with that at all. Sparano was an up and coming coach when he was hired. It is hard to tell whether an up and coming coach can handle being a head coach or not.
I suspect he was responsible for some things that happened at that point, just not the major things like whom to hire as a head coach and whom to draft #1 overall. Think about it like this: many people here want this bevy of draft picks next year to be made by some guy they think is much better than Jeff Ireland. Do you really think Bill Parcells, in his first year after taking over a 1-15 organization he's trying to turn around, is going to do the opposite and allow a guy with no track record as a GM to make the first overall pick in the draft? "Puppet" is the wrong word. It's "apprentice." Ireland was probably responsible for some smaller-scale things, but not responsible for the major decisions. The confirmation of this is found in the fact that he's still here IMO. What, are Stephen Ross and Carl Peterson stupid? Are they going to fire Tony Sparano and let Chad Henne go, while keeping around the guy who was responsible for bringing them in? That's inconsistent. The only way you could make sense of that is by thinking both Ross and Peterson are stupid, and that's inconsistent with 1) Ross's success in life, and 2) Peterson's experience in the NFL in these types of matters.
Oh he shares the responsibility(Most IMO). What I was saying is if your drafting starters for a team that ends up being not that good, it's hard to gauge how much of an achievement that should be considered.
Making a bad personnel decision doesn't make you stupid. It can be just that; a bad decision. And good God, how many times does it have to be mentioned that Business success does NOT = Success in sports. Stephen Ross has done a pretty bang-up job of highlighting this.
So Ross is not only smart enough to be a billionaire, but he has Carl Peterson advising him as well, and they put their heads together and came up with the idea that Tony Sparano should be fired and Chad Henne let go, but the guy responsible for hiring them both should be kept?
Either way, it's laughable that because Ross is a billionaire he's automatically a smart football guy. As if he evolved, Pokemon style, as soon as his net worth rolled over from 999,999,999 to 1 Billion
It's maddening being stuck in mediocrity for so long. Ireland is swaying in the wind right now. I am pretty certain he will be back in 2013 but if we don't get over the "mediocre" label by then he should and would be fired. I like a lot of the players on this team and still think we're more talented than people think but the lack of playmakers is frustrating. Guys gotta step up, and that starts with Ireland.
That's part of the point. Ireland neither hired Sparano nor drafted Jake Long IMO. I suspect that's why he's still here.
I really don't understand the point of harping on this Ireland/Parcells thing over and over again. This stuff was over 4 years ago. It doesn't matter who's idea was who's. All that matters is the current state of the roster.
Who's a smarter one? You? Who's going to make a better decision here? Two guys who have intimate, inside knowledge of the situation, one a billionaire and the other with the NFL experience of Carl Peterson, or you? Come on folks. This is getting crazy. We're fans on a message board. Remember that.
But Jeff Ireland's historical level of control over that roster is what determines whether he's at fault for it or not.
I didn't say he shouldn't be held accountable. He should be held accountable for whatever picks were made while he was here unless there is clear evidence that he objected to it and was overruled.
Haha, there you go. Yes, I'm smarter than Stephen Ross. I said so right there in the post you quoted. Your legs ok after that leap?
So then please, let me in on how you know he made a bad decision in keeping Jeff Ireland. Present a case that says nothing about how you're more knowledgeable, informed, or intelligent about the matter than Stephen Ross and Carl Peterson.
