Pass. I was shocked Raiders took him off tv to do it. Leave real football to the pros. Let Kiper, Mayock, and the other tv people play fantasy GM.
Would he be a good GM choice for the Steelers?
Which way are you leaning? Pretty good debate. I guess that is dependant on how great Hunt's evals are.I saw a very interesting discussion about who makes a better GM: a number cruncher or someone with a scouting background
The thoughts with a GM with a scouting background is they'll trust their own evaluations and not necessarily listen to the scouts. A number cruncher is more open to input from the team scouts, but the question from them is how do they evaluate all of this input when they don't have that type of background.
The Steelers are in this spot with Khan and Hunt if they want to promote from within whenever Colbert retires.
Hopefully better than trading up for Bush, reaching for Edmunds & burns and trusting Green to start at C in Ben's final season.Which way are you leaning? Pretty good debate. I guess that is dependant on how great Hunt's evals are.
Yep assess who is making the majority of the bad decisions and rid themselves of whoever it is.Hopefully better than trading up for Bush, reaching for Edmunds & burns and trusting Green to start at C in Ben's final season.
I think Rooneys should take a good look into what's going on there and fix their ****.
I can see the value on both sides of the debate. I suppose it depends on how you want to approach things from an organizational perspective. I'm probably a bit biased because of Colbert, but I'd lean in the direction of a scouting background. Teams are built through the draft and supplemented in free agency. I suppose I like the idea to have a GM who has that scouting knowledge, but they still have to trust the team around them in with their evaluations.Which way are you leaning? Pretty good debate. I guess that is dependant on how great Hunt's evals are.
I agree can't have too many draft eval capable types in the decision making process. Hopefully the home run it this year. I didn't think this last draft was bad other than trying to fit a square peg of a G into a round hole. Little surprised they signed off on Green with him having so little experience at the position. Then doubled down and forced his play for the majority of the season.I can see the value on both sides of the debate. I suppose it depends on how you want to approach things from an organizational perspective. I'm probably a bit biased because of Colbert, but I'd lean in the direction of a scouting background. Teams are built through the draft and supplemented in free agency. I suppose I like the idea to have a GM who has that scouting knowledge, but they still have to trust the team around them in with their evaluations.
Especially if you threw in Peg.I’d take Polk Highs own legendary Al Bundy as GM before I took Mayock.
1981 from Boston College...made it to final cuts. so there is a connection however slight.
I agree can't have too many draft eval capable types in the decision making process. Hopefully the home run it this year. I didn't think this last draft was bad other than trying to fit a square peg of a G into a round hole. Little surprised they signed off on Green with him having so little experience at the position. Then doubled down and forced his play for the majority of the season.
I’d be fine with either one of these two. I don’t think it will happen though but would be cool if one was hired.If ever a chance I'd talk to Bill Cowher and give him complete control, including coaching personnel decisions. Start this year with the transformation from below average Joe to MEGA JOE.
Possible Tony Dunge. I'm just throwing O'l STEELERS guys out there who could possible get the "tough" & "winning" tradition back.
Salute the nation