Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    Gee let's see he has been very successful doing it his smaller staff way.

    so damn right he should make the staff larger think how great he'd be ;0

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    BB is paranoid. Less is more for people like that.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    BB is paranoid. Less is more for people like that.



    more insecure i suspect than paranoid, but one can feed into the other.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ytsejamer1. Show Ytsejamer1's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    I don't mind the smaller staff thing...it makes some amount of sense.  The problem I have is with the jamokes BB did hire, coaching the defense (Pepper Johnson aside of course).  I'd like some better coaching on that side of the ball.


    I don't think we need to see another year of horrific pass defense to realize that Josh Boyer and Brian Fuentes are not doing the job back there....Boyer moreso than Fuentes as Feuntes was just hired last year.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.




    Consider the source.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from natesubs. Show natesubs's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    bring in bret maxie of the titans to be our DB's coach

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     




    Consider the source.

     



    Point taken, sir.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to digger0862's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     




    Consider the source.

     




    I always do. Observations from those incapable of objectivity regarding their sacred cows are always best taken with a grain of salt.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to digger0862's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     




    Consider the source.

     

     




    I always do. Observations from those incapable of objectivity regarding their sacred cows are always best taken with a grain of salt.

     



    Objectivity; a word no doubt that applies to your view of Tom Brady.  

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to digger0862's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     




    Consider the source.

     

     




    I always do. Observations from those incapable of objectivity regarding their sacred cows are always best taken with a grain of salt.

     

     



    Objectivity; a word no doubt that applies to your view of Tom Brady.  

     




    Very much so. I have readily admitted when he makes mistakes or generally has played poorly. But, unlike the Village Idiot, I don't blame him for every problem that ails the team.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.




    So, you prefer robotic yes men just like BB?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to digger0862's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     




    Consider the source.

     

     




    I always do. Observations from those incapable of objectivity regarding their sacred cows are always best taken with a grain of salt.

     

     



    Objectivity; a word no doubt that applies to your view of Tom Brady.  

     

     




    Very much so. I have readily admitted when he makes mistakes or generally has played poorly. But, unlike the Village Idiot, I don't blame him for every problem that ails the team.

     



    Interesting.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.

     




    So, you prefer robotic yes men just like BB?

     



    I prefer guys who operate and function as a coaching unit with one consistent and clear message, yes.

    That does not preclude me from meeting with them and having open dialog and self assesment about our team as it is currently performing and making tweaks. I am not close minded nor do I think BB is.

    However, do I ever just have an assistant that I just say ok here you have this responsibility deal with it and do whatever you want with it? No, I do not.

    Unlike some big conglomerate where you might be a SVP of something and have no idea about some other positions job and responsibilities, in sports you typically do understand it all if you are at the head coaching level.

    You are ultimately responsible and the buck stops with you so if it is going to go bad or you are going to take the fall for something then you want it to be a true refelction of what you are trying to accomplish. If BB got fired and in large part it was because his defense stunk, for example, I am sure he would be able to deal with that more if it was his system and philosophy more than if he left it up to someone else and he got fired because the team had a bad defense. If you end up on the outs then you want to go out on your own failures and not someone else's.

    I don't think you are ever hiring drones, idiots, or robots. Those types of people will very rarely have all the attributes I listed previously.

    Most of the poeple he has had have gone on to equal or bigger opportunities. So whether fail or success, others have thought highly of them as well. Weis, Crennel, Groh, McDaniels, O'Brien, Pees, Capers, etc. Are those all your robotic yes men you are referring to?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.

     




    So, you prefer robotic yes men just like BB?

     

     



    I prefer guys who operate and function as a coaching unit with one consistent and clear message, yes.

     

    That does not preclude me from meeting with them and having open dialog and self assesment about our team as it is currently performing and making tweaks. I am not close minded nor do I think BB is.

    However, do I ever just have an assistant that I just say ok here you have this responsibility deal with it and do whatever you want with it? No, I do not.

    Unlike some big conglomerate where you might be a SVP of something and have no idea about some other positions job and responsibilities, in sports you typically do understand it all if you are at the head coaching level.

    You are ultimately responsible and the buck stops with you so if it is going to go bad or you are going to take the fall for something then you want it to be a true refelction of what you are trying to accomplish. If BB got fired and in large part it was because his defense stunk, for example, I am sure he would be able to deal with that more if it was his system and philosophy more than if he left it up to someone else and he got fired because the team had a bad defense. If you end up on the outs then you want to go out on your own failures and not someone else's.

    I don't think you are ever hiring drones, idiots, or robots. Those types of people will very rarely have all the attributes I listed previously.

    Most of the poeple he has had have gone on to equal or bigger opportunities. So whether fail or success, others have thought highly of them as well. Weis, Crennel, Groh, McDaniels, O'Brien, Pees, Capers, etc. Are those all your robotic yes men you are referring to?




    Seems you and BB are both of the micromanagement school. Some ascribe to that. Others hire talented people and let them work their magic, intervening only when the results are not suitable. Micromanagement usually is the result of a personality disorder rather than a tried and true results oriented approach. Of course if one is surrounded by incompetence one has to micromanage, but then the choices they made to fill the positions needs to be questioned.

    If I were your boss and you were a micro manager, I would fire you.

     

    I'm a bit incredulous at some of the names you have brandished to make your point here. Capers for instance was simply a consultant in real terms and allowed little or no real impact on the team. So he bolted to GB and got a real job.

     

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.

     




    So, you prefer robotic yes men just like BB?

     

     



    I prefer guys who operate and function as a coaching unit with one consistent and clear message, yes.

     

    That does not preclude me from meeting with them and having open dialog and self assesment about our team as it is currently performing and making tweaks. I am not close minded nor do I think BB is.

    However, do I ever just have an assistant that I just say ok here you have this responsibility deal with it and do whatever you want with it? No, I do not.

    Unlike some big conglomerate where you might be a SVP of something and have no idea about some other positions job and responsibilities, in sports you typically do understand it all if you are at the head coaching level.

    You are ultimately responsible and the buck stops with you so if it is going to go bad or you are going to take the fall for something then you want it to be a true refelction of what you are trying to accomplish. If BB got fired and in large part it was because his defense stunk, for example, I am sure he would be able to deal with that more if it was his system and philosophy more than if he left it up to someone else and he got fired because the team had a bad defense. If you end up on the outs then you want to go out on your own failures and not someone else's.

    I don't think you are ever hiring drones, idiots, or robots. Those types of people will very rarely have all the attributes I listed previously.

    Most of the poeple he has had have gone on to equal or bigger opportunities. So whether fail or success, others have thought highly of them as well. Weis, Crennel, Groh, McDaniels, O'Brien, Pees, Capers, etc. Are those all your robotic yes men you are referring to?

     




    Seems you and BB are both of the micromanagement school. Some ascribe to that. Others hire talented people and let them work their magic, intervening only when the results are not suitable. Micromanagement usually is the result of a personality disorder rather than a tried and true results oriented approach. Of course if one is surrounded by incompetence one has to micromanage, but then the choices they made to fill the positions needs to be questioned.

     

    If I were your boss and you were a micro manager, I would fire you.

     

    I'm a bit incredulous at some of the names you have brandished to make your point here. Capers for instance was simply a consultant in real terms and allowed little or no real impact on the team. So he bolted to GB and got a real job.

     

     



    Stick to football, Babe.  Leave the management consulting to the professionals.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.

     




    So, you prefer robotic yes men just like BB?

     

     



    I prefer guys who operate and function as a coaching unit with one consistent and clear message, yes.

     

    That does not preclude me from meeting with them and having open dialog and self assesment about our team as it is currently performing and making tweaks. I am not close minded nor do I think BB is.

    However, do I ever just have an assistant that I just say ok here you have this responsibility deal with it and do whatever you want with it? No, I do not.

    Unlike some big conglomerate where you might be a SVP of something and have no idea about some other positions job and responsibilities, in sports you typically do understand it all if you are at the head coaching level.

    You are ultimately responsible and the buck stops with you so if it is going to go bad or you are going to take the fall for something then you want it to be a true refelction of what you are trying to accomplish. If BB got fired and in large part it was because his defense stunk, for example, I am sure he would be able to deal with that more if it was his system and philosophy more than if he left it up to someone else and he got fired because the team had a bad defense. If you end up on the outs then you want to go out on your own failures and not someone else's.

    I don't think you are ever hiring drones, idiots, or robots. Those types of people will very rarely have all the attributes I listed previously.

    Most of the poeple he has had have gone on to equal or bigger opportunities. So whether fail or success, others have thought highly of them as well. Weis, Crennel, Groh, McDaniels, O'Brien, Pees, Capers, etc. Are those all your robotic yes men you are referring to?

     




    Seems you and BB are both of the micromanagement school. Some ascribe to that. Others hire talented people and let them work their magic, intervening only when the results are not suitable. Micromanagement usually is the result of a personality disorder rather than a tried and true results oriented approach. Of course if one is surrounded by incompetence one has to micromanage, but then the choices they made to fill the positions needs to be questioned.

     

    If I were your boss and you were a micro manager, I would fire you.

     

    I'm a bit incredulous at some of the names you have brandished to make your point here. Capers for instance was simply a consultant in real terms and allowed little or no real impact on the team. So he bolted to GB and got a real job.

     

     

     



    I figured you would go the micromanagement route and I can see how you could go there. However I view micro-mangment as hovering and being involved in every second. I have assistant coaches i feel are competent, buy into what I am trying to accomplish, and who I trust to work within the confines of that structure. Then they are left to their own.

     

    I have no idea exactly how BB is as a coach but I suspect its at least somewhat similar from a casual observation.

    I think your sentence that I highlighted is exactly what I prefer to think my coaching style is. The only qualification is I set clearly defined guidlines for how i want that magic worked within a given set of game conditions(That's the philospohy, you have to have one). There is a large fenced in area, if you will, but the fence can be hopped from time to time within reason.

    I was not really using the list to bolster any point just asking a question as I do not know who he must hire to meet your approval. Those are all name type guys who have had success in specific roles and I never really thought about it before this conversation. It seemed to be that he has hired some acceptable guys that not only he but others in the NFL seem to agree are knowledgable was my only point. I am not sure how else to look at it.

    As far as Capers he was a DB coach wasn't he? Don't recall specifically and titles are not always exactly representative or responsibilties and I am not there. However he thought highly enough of BB to accept the position and BB was open and thought highly enough to offer the job. No way around either of those facts. If Capers was not going to get the DC job or not I have no idea. If he was going to get the job but had to run a system he was not comfortable with and had an opportunity with another team that had a philosophy more inline with his own its just a normal decision for him. Is it not?

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.




    to put this simpler control freaks don't play well with others

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to digger0862's comment:

     

    In response to ATJ's comment:

     

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.

     




    Consider the source.

     

     




    I always do. Observations from those incapable of objectivity regarding their sacred cows are always best taken with a grain of salt.

     

     



    Objectivity; a word no doubt that applies to your view of Tom Brady.  

     

     




    Very much so. I have readily admitted when he makes mistakes or generally has played poorly. But, unlike the Village Idiot, I don't blame him for every problem that ails the team.

     

     



    Interesting.

     




    put it this way ATJ: if babe swings lets say 20% in an excessive pro- Brady viewpoint then Rusty swings in the 75% excessive anti-Brady agenda...

    Babe is a lot more measured and objective on his end than Rusty is on his

    and I have never seen babe inject a pro-brady point in threads that have nothing to do with that whereas ol' Rustoleum basically injects his inappropriately and out-of-context continually

    example:

    OP: what do you think of the forecast for this weeks game?

    Rusty: put brady under center and run the ball

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    Insecure? Paranoid? Interesting characterizations neither of which apply in my opinion.  Regardless I don't really care.  There's no one I'd rather have running the Pats football operation.



    id prefer a co gm or gm to bb's coach plus.

    were i kraft, id want a top gm, and top coaches all around not just bb's position. 

    (your opinon may vary)

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

     

    BB's reasons make absolute perfect sense to me as a coach.

    It is not always easy to find coaches to work under you who will follow direction exactly how you want things done, including not only the philosophy and techniques but even the language you want used in the teachings.

    Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators.

    Personally I don't think having a predefined number of bodies has anything to do with it.

     




    to put this simpler control freaks don't play well with others

     




    and insucurity is one of the many thigns at the core, when you have "control freaks"

     

    "Your coaching staff needs to be organized, productive, effiecient, visually detail oriented to break down mechanics and technique into smaller parts, as well as clear communicators."

    maybe so, but clearly this is not happeing positionally, game plan-wise (esp on offense), nor game management wise. better coached teams / better defenses are out coaching the pats

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Is this a good or bad thing with BB and his approach to staffing?

    In response to Ytsejamer1's comment:

    I don't mind the smaller staff thing...it makes some amount of sense.  The problem I have is with the jamokes BB did hire, coaching the defense (Pepper Johnson aside of course).  I'd like some better coaching on that side of the ball.


    I don't think we need to see another year of horrific pass defense to realize that Josh Boyer and Brian Fuentes are not doing the job back there....Boyer moreso than Fuentes as Feuntes was just hired last year.




    "I don't mind the smaller staff thing...it makes some amount of sense.  The problem I have is with the jamokes BB did hire, coaching the defense (Pepper Johnson aside of course).  I'd like some better coaching on that side of the ball."

    agred. exactly

     

Share