no. sorry, but stop pretending he wasn't obscure. He was a strength and conditioning coach at shitty colleges for 20 years. He has no business in this job.
yep, and nobody cares about those non-kneeling mistakes that happen every game. of course, there's plenty of other things to worry about, but that problem happening every game is symptomatic of a poorly coached squad.
Most GMs get a second head coach hire unless they [expletive] the bed in all other aspects of the job. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk He's not most GMs, he was an experiment. He in no way should be allowed another hire. But I'm sure he will anyway What makes him not most GMs. Coming up through scouting and director of college scouting isn't some obscure GM path. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk emery was obscure as hell and would never get this opportunity again if fired tomorrow.
I don't see why that would necessarily be true. Maybe it should, but it doesn't really make a difference unless there's some magical guy out there ready to control.
Exactly they were both outside the box high risk/high reward hires that failed miserably. I know what you are going for here, but I don't see the basis for the "high reward" part of the equation. If cheap guys who nobody else was going to hire take you to the playoffs, it's high reward. but that won't happen
Coach of the 1-8 Bucs? Yeah, because he inherited such a great team... Lovie did more with far less talent. Lovie had the most talented bears team since '85 and [expletive] the bed with his own poor personnel input.
I mean, when you saw them you would never think Emery would be a quality GM or Trestman would be a quality head coach in the NFL, and, well. They still look exactly what they looked like before.
That's, like, your interpretation man. I don't see that in there at all. Although it is blatantly obvious that all the leaks about "now is the time" are due in part to the timing of the tv deal. They have a product to sell and that product has been poorly rated for a long time. If I read anything into that it is that the tank job was due in part to force wgns hand to bail. But that's a stretch.
ricketts meant tv deal -> spending money, not spending money -> tv deal i'm not saying adding players (and maddon) and the surrounding excitement might not help down the stretch with this tv contract, but that's definitely not what he was saying. I think you misinterpreted what you quoted at least as badly as you think that person misinterpreted Ricketts.
http://m.mlb.com/news/article/100839258/cubs-not-going-to-force-offseason-moves-says-general-manager-jed-hoyer Muskat article including an MLB.com video with harold reynolds and nightengale talking about the cubs
Mark Gonzales @MDGonzales · 2m2 minutes ago "If the right things line up, we could have an active off-season. We're not going to force it." Mark Gonzales @MDGonzales · 3m3 minutes ago GM Jed Hoyer said overstated reports of Cubs linked to every free agent is somewhat agent driven, given team's payroll flexibility.
But MLB doesn't have a salary cap and you can't keep productive players on your NHL roster for 6 years before they start making the big bucks. Paying a guy what they get (more than most of them get actually) just because some other teams do it is not a smart way to work around cap issues. Call me crazy but the Jimmy Howard comparisons from earlier isn't encouraging. Detroit did a great job for a while but I'm not exactly hopeful that the Blackhawks will follow their lead going forward.