Fredd
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 4,995
- Reaction score
- 2,238
Working in a business/office environment for over 20 years, I can't help but relate what is going on with our offense and compare it to a business
If the offense were an actual business and it continued to screw up like they are, the Executive Team (ET) holds a meeting/conference call and gets a project plan together to fix the issue. The Project Manager (PM) gathers all of the appropriate people like the Director (DIR), Office Manager (OM), their supervisors (SUP) and key staff (KS). You discuss everything that is working and, more importantly, what is not. You get everyone on board with the same thought process. You set timelines for fixes to the problem and the PM follows the process every step of the way, communicating progress to the ET. The PM reports the progress to the DIR who reports to the ET. If the project fails, you get rid of the PM since they didn't fix the problem. You likely write-up the OM with a stern warning. The DIR has no repercussions since the think tank is run by the PM.
Here is the (obvious) problem
ET = Jerry Jones
PM = Jerry Jones
DIR = Jason Garrett
OM = Callahan
SUP = Romo
KS = Game Plan
Timeline: None
1) the ET will NEVER fire the PM, and thus, this project will linger with no actual resolution (17 years and counting) because the same ET hand-selected the DIR
2) the OM has thrown his hands up in the air, trying to implement the PM's plan; you have to rely on the plan to succeed, but if everyone has bought into the PM's plan, then it should work, right? Not necessarily.
3) If you are trying to succeed (again, 17 years), but are waiting for the plan to fail because it belongs to the PM, then you are waiting for the PM to get fired and bring in a new PM to make a difference. It is one thing to NOT execute the plan, it is another to do it and fail (the 2013 cowboys)
4) Point #3 above should bring in a new PM, but point #1 supersedes that (CATCH 22)
the offense is mired in mediocrity and can't put anything legitimate together from week to week. who gets fired in my scenario? whether right or wrong, you don't fire the SUP or the KS - as they are just following orders. As mentioned above, the ET will NEVER fire the PM or the DIR....something has to give...the pathetic PM that our business has has no clue how to run the said business, so if that is the person rallying the troops, then the business is going to fail time and time again.
you rely on the PM to keep everything running according to the plan, but if the plan is not good and the PM is too busy with other things, then the plan falls apart...
I give you, the 2013 Dallas Cowboys offense
If the offense were an actual business and it continued to screw up like they are, the Executive Team (ET) holds a meeting/conference call and gets a project plan together to fix the issue. The Project Manager (PM) gathers all of the appropriate people like the Director (DIR), Office Manager (OM), their supervisors (SUP) and key staff (KS). You discuss everything that is working and, more importantly, what is not. You get everyone on board with the same thought process. You set timelines for fixes to the problem and the PM follows the process every step of the way, communicating progress to the ET. The PM reports the progress to the DIR who reports to the ET. If the project fails, you get rid of the PM since they didn't fix the problem. You likely write-up the OM with a stern warning. The DIR has no repercussions since the think tank is run by the PM.
Here is the (obvious) problem
ET = Jerry Jones
PM = Jerry Jones
DIR = Jason Garrett
OM = Callahan
SUP = Romo
KS = Game Plan
Timeline: None
1) the ET will NEVER fire the PM, and thus, this project will linger with no actual resolution (17 years and counting) because the same ET hand-selected the DIR
2) the OM has thrown his hands up in the air, trying to implement the PM's plan; you have to rely on the plan to succeed, but if everyone has bought into the PM's plan, then it should work, right? Not necessarily.
3) If you are trying to succeed (again, 17 years), but are waiting for the plan to fail because it belongs to the PM, then you are waiting for the PM to get fired and bring in a new PM to make a difference. It is one thing to NOT execute the plan, it is another to do it and fail (the 2013 cowboys)
4) Point #3 above should bring in a new PM, but point #1 supersedes that (CATCH 22)
the offense is mired in mediocrity and can't put anything legitimate together from week to week. who gets fired in my scenario? whether right or wrong, you don't fire the SUP or the KS - as they are just following orders. As mentioned above, the ET will NEVER fire the PM or the DIR....something has to give...the pathetic PM that our business has has no clue how to run the said business, so if that is the person rallying the troops, then the business is going to fail time and time again.
you rely on the PM to keep everything running according to the plan, but if the plan is not good and the PM is too busy with other things, then the plan falls apart...
I give you, the 2013 Dallas Cowboys offense