This is where we disagree. The difference between having a good front office is the ability to find that player that very few people know about--not everyone is going to have the same grade on the same player. Cerrato and the Commanders drafted Malcom Kelly in the 2nd round, many teams had him on their do not draft list.
And why is that?
Because Kelly had notorious knee problems. I mentioned that already and used Ronald Leary as an example.
The Seahawks took Bruce Irvin in the 1st round, the Commanders had a 7th round grade on him.
And why was that?
Because Irvin had some serious off the field issues.
As I said, outside of players that have medical or off the field issues....you're just not going to see many that have vastly different grades on a player.
The Raiders took Mike Mitchell in the 2nd round--many teams didn't have a scouting report on him.
This has been proven to be untrue. Even Rick Gosselin, the best NFL draft analyst out there, pointed out later on that teams had scouting reports on him and several had him as a 2nd-3rd round grade. It's just that Kiper didn't have a draft grade on him and while I could do without Gosselin talking about the NFL, his draft expertise and contacts blow Kiper's away.
And exactly what did Mitchell accomplish in Oakland?
Zip.
Goes to Carolina and turns out to be a quality starting safety when you have a coach like Ron Rivera that is a good defensive coach.
Would Richard Sherman be worth a **** in Washington? Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know because our talent evaluators took Dejon Gomes instead, who is out of the league. Is that coaching or talent evaluation?
I would take Pete Carroll as a defensive mind over Jim Haslett any day of the week, especially given Pete's prowess with working with defensive backs and Haslett's poor track record of working with defensive backs. Sherman went basically where most teams thought he would. He wasn't a 'find' that other teams didn't know about or the Seahawks magically thought was far better than everybody else thought.
Honestly, I have no idea why Jimmy Johnson failed in Miami. I am willing bet, thought, he probably didn't have the same support structure he had in Dallas, as far as scouts, etc.
Dallas had the same support structure and went steadily downhill because Switzer and then Gailey are weak coaches.
What Jimmy didn't have was his same assistant coaches. Wannstedt was in Chicago. Norv was with the Skins. Butch Davis was at the U. Avezzano was still with the Cowboys.
Just like the Cowboys struggled badly on offense when David Shula was the O-Coordinator and then became a completely different offense when Norv became the O-Coordinator.
The other issue is that he was saddled with Marino who wasn't the same QB and he couldn't quite figure out how to re-design the offense to suit Marino's diminishing skills and George Stevens couldn't figure out how to get that done.
However--his case speaks directly to my point. If identifying players was so easy, every coach/gm should have succeeded, when most fail. Why is that? Because there is far too much work that goes into both for one person to do.
I never said being a GM was unimportant (in fact, I pointed out that it wasn't unimportant). The scouts have a job to do and that allows the coach to do their job. If the coach is focusing on scouting and every single personnel matter, then there is less time for them to focus on their coaching and developing of players.
Add to that, Barry Switzer is a complete moron, but had a roster full of future HOFers, and won a Super Bowl. Is he a better coach, then say Andy Reid?
Just like I told you with the Wade example....he inherited a team that was filled with well developed players from the previous coach. Of course they shouldn't be a disaster 1-year into taking over the team. But, over time the team got worse and worse because Switzer didn't have a clue on how to develop talent.
It's the same with Wade. Wade took over a team that was loaded with well developed talent, but after a while the team is filled with players that he developed.
Did Jerry suddenly become more brilliant in picking players during 2007-2009? And then did he lose it from 2010-2013? And now has he regained it?
Or was it that Parcells was a good developer of talent and he left Wade with a team of well developed players and Wade eventually left the Cowboys with poorly developed talent and that took Garrett 3-years to turn things around?
Look at the Bengals for cryin' out loud. They were the joke of the NFL with Mike Brown. He's been making personnel decision up until this year (and he still has a say) and the Bengals are suddenly as solid of a drafting team out there. When did Mike Brown become a 'good eye for talent?' Or is Marvin Lewis a pretty darn good coach?
The fact is that I have shown far more examples that indicate coaching > than GM and that the GM position is overrated. You can't have a guy giving ridiculous contracts out and you can't be throwing away drafts in favor of FA's or trading up all of your picks for one player (i.e. Mike Ditka in New Orleans). But, this magic eye for talent is largely a myth.
A good GM will find a good head coach and supply him with a good coaching staff and players that in general fit the coach's schemes. Some like Belichick are more into finding a player that fits Belichick's character and style of coaching.
Obviously, Jerry has made some boneheaded moves like giving up so much for a WR. Even if Roy Williams and Joey Galloway performed well, it's still too much to give away. And giving out big contracts to players in their 30's is a recipe for disaster due to the injury rate in the league.
But in the end, he hasn't suddenly developed a great eye for talent. He has put together a superb coaching staff and they have collectively drafted players that fit the coaching staff's schemes which isn't exactly hard to do. And the staff has done a fantastic job of developing players like Murray, Dez, Williams, Beasley, the entire O-Line, Crawford, Carter, McClain (who was considered a bust coming out of Oakland), Durant (a journeyman who played great this year), Hitchens, Wilcox, etc.
YR
