Jump to content

Nastradamus

Mayhew and Lewand fired!

Recommended Posts

Wasn't there a minor league team that did something like this as a gimmick for a game? In reality it would be impossible to do within the standard play clock. And it wouldn't really accomplish your hopes JBK because:

1.) Most of the time it would be 60% or 70% voted for play X. So only the other 30% can complain... it would be 15% voted for play-X, 14% for play-Y, 14% for play-Z. 10% for play-A, 9% for play-B, 8% for play-C, 8% for play-D, 7% for play-E, and 15% for a dozen other plays. So when play-X fails you still have 85% of the voters complaining.

AND...

2.) Of the 15% who did vote for play-X, 60% will blame the players for failing to execute it properly, and 30% will blame the refs for missing and obvious call against the opposing team that prevented the play from working.

So you'll end up with about 10% of 15% of voters who don't complain. Maybe.

hahahaha true. Fans will always find a reason to *****.

I think it would work if you had the play up during the other play. So you are really not watching the play that is happening you are deciding on what to do for the next play. So Stafford hands the ball off and while that is happening the other plays are already up for vote. You get 10-15 seconds or so to pick...once the timer ends whichever play has the most votes automatically gets sent to Stafford in the huddle.

You could time it to the hike. Once the ball is snapped the timer for the new play starts. You get 15-20 seconds while the other play is finishing up to make the next play call. It gets sent to Stafford immediately.

It would be a logistical nightmare, but I think in theory it would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hahahaha true. Fans will always find a reason to *****.

I think it would work if you had the play up during the other play. So you are really not watching the play that is happening you are deciding on what to do for the next play. So Stafford hands the ball off and while that is happening the other plays are already up for vote. You get 10-15 seconds or so to pick...once the timer ends whichever play has the most votes automatically gets sent to Stafford in the huddle.

You could time it to the hike. Once the ball is snapped the timer for the new play starts. You get 15-20 seconds while the other play is finishing up to make the next play call. It gets sent to Stafford immediately.

It would be a logistical nightmare, but I think in theory it would work.

While that might work in the sense of getting the vote done in time, it would be an utter failure as a social experiment to see if fans could call a game because the next play depends on the results of the previous play, or at least it should.

Pick up 9.5 yards on first down? Next play should be a shot down field.

Got sacked and lost 4 yards? I'm not going to call a run up the gut as the next play then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While that might work in the sense of getting the vote done in time, it would be an utter failure as a social experiment to see if fans could call a game because the next play depends on the results of the previous play, or at least it should.

Pick up 9.5 yards on first down? Next play should be a shot down field.

Got sacked and lost 4 yards? I'm not going to call a run up the gut as the next play then.

Ok then as soon as the player with the ball is down you start the timer so you know the distance. You get 10 seconds to get the call in, Stafford takes a couple seconds relaying it to the team, break huddle and get up to the line and you should still have 10 seconds or so left to make adjustments etc at the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While that might work in the sense of getting the vote done in time, it would be an utter failure as a social experiment to see if fans could call a game because the next play depends on the results of the previous play, or at least it should.

Pick up 9.5 yards on first down? Next play should be a shot down field.

Got sacked and lost 4 yards? I'm not going to call a run up the gut as the next play then.

If you're following the Joe Lombardi way then after that sack on 3rd and 21 you would dial up a screen to Theo Riddick or Joquie Bell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can talk about past arguments, or you can continue with the current one. I've eaten my crow, I am still here. Everything isn't as complicated as you always try and make it.

From your previous post, I separated the three statements to make the referencing easier:

You're making it seem like she is a building a space rocket and the Lions new home will be on Mars.

Wrong, dead wrong, I have always said that the Lions have always needed to hire the right Executive and support his work; as an example I always cited Ilitch hiring Dave D...nothing like building a spaceship or even a model of a spaceship.

All she has to do is hire one competent person who then builds the rest.

You say this as if this is news to me....it's been my principal argument for years about the failures of the Lions' organization.

You're take isn't surprising though.

Lemme get this straight....I make a doubtful comment about Mrs. Ford's ability to right the ship, and you dismiss what I'm saying because I considered her husband to be an historically incompetent owner and the Lions a colossal 50+ year failure under WCFS.

So because I was 100% correct about WCFS being a failure and the Lions being a failure under his ownership, and because I was further right that the most recent FO that he left behind was also a failure (a view shared by Mrs. Ford I might add), in your mind that means that I'm not to be trusted to comment about Mrs. Ford?

Hmmm.....if anybody's bias is showing, it's yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will clarify one thing: most good organizations have dynamic relationships between the owners and the managers. It's not just about hiring the right people and disappearing. The guy writing the checks needs to be engaged at some level and be effective in supporting his/her executives and managers. That goes beyond writing checks.

WCFS was good a writing checks (after Barry left anyway). That didn't make him a better owner tho b/c of Millen.

WCFS was a teeny bit better at hiring executives after Millen was fired, but firing Millen and writing checks still wasn't enough.

Martha fired the remnant of the Millen FO and her husband's leadership team, but that's not enough either.

If hiring the "right" guy were soooooo easy as T/P seems to suggest, then the Lions and other bad organizations in the various sports fields would be good at it as a matter of course. But of course it's not that easy (note I said "not that easy", which is NOT to say that I think it's complicated -- in my view, hiring Mr. Right Guy Executive (MRGE) is not easy to accomplish but is not really complicated -- it takes judgment, which is usually enhanced by progressive experience, which of course Mrs. Ford lacks, and her husband, due to his negative experience, also lacked).

Even a MRGE needs more than his own talent to succeed at being an Executive, because he's going up against at least a handful of other MRGEs who are also really good at what they do; and most of the really good ones have an engaged and capable owner behind them who can do more than just write checks/hire/fire.

An owner with MRGE also needs to evaluate/support/hold accountable and make changes to the FO. Again, not complicated, but not easy. Sometimes that = overriding MRGE decisions, changing lines of MRGE responsibility, and creating MRGE succession planning. Good owners and organizations do these things as a matter of course, as part of building a successful culture and overall FO teamwork/competency....these things happen before the **** hits the fan in good organizations, not simply as a result of piled up losses and decades of failure.

Disengaged and/or incompetent owners are more likely to wait until things fall apart to fire people, which makes the task harder for the next FO to get things back on track.

Edited by sabretooth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good find.

The most damning line, in my mind:

Either Stafford isn’t allowed to change anything at the line, which you would think may change after the Lions fired their offensive coordinator following this game, or he is, and didn’t do it here.

Earlier in the season, I recall Stafford getting questions about his ability to make calls at the line and answering - in very vague terms - that no, he didn't really have that flexibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good find.

The most damning line, in my mind:

Earlier in the season, I recall Stafford getting questions about his ability to make calls at the line and answering - in very vague terms - that no, he didn't really have that flexibility.

They have him doing some of the stuff Raiola used to do. Not sure if that's a good idea or not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of the items in my last post are "complicated", as T/P has suggested....everything I've said in this thread is basic management....and although it's conceptually basic, in order to hire winning FOs, you need to be better at it than at least the vast majority of the other 30 owners....that is not a "gimme" in any way, shape or form.

I don't see what Mrs. Ford possesses that fans should/would naturally have confidence in her ability to get it more right than most of the other owners, especially the successful ones who already have it figured out and have the right people in the right places.

Mrs. Ford does has the advantage of chasing after the hottest talent available at the moment, but frankly that hottest talent resides in successful organizations where they are already part of the succession plan....to jump ship from the Pats or Pack and to join forces with Mrs. Ford's ownership tenure, which has a fairly limited effective life expectancy, may not be seen by some of the aforementioned hottest executive talent out there as their best career move.

Edited by sabretooth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, let me state for the record that I like what I see of Mrs. Ford, and I admire her pluck in canning the leadership gang, hiring a top-flight executive search firm, and making a public commitment to the fans to get it right....for that I applaud her and I support her wholeheartedly and I hope with all of my being that she does find Mr. Right, and that together they figure it out and make the Lions an awesome organization.

I am not brimming with confidence in the likelihood of the above hoped-for happy outcome....but I do believe that the ownership with Mrs. Ford is in better shape than it's been in in my lifetime, and they have a 50/50 shot to hire a much better FO than they have ever had before in modern Lions history. For that all of you Lions fans have good reason to be hopeful for improvement, and possibly a major improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Martha and her son/daughters can work well together, there's no reason that they couldn't be a successful ownership group. It would have the benefit of a leader (Martha) and a succession plan, provided that the "kids" don't intend to blow it up after Martha backs out or dies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...