
Originally Posted by
Purple Floyd
So now Wilf did what many wanted in naming a GM, but IMHO he stopped short of what was really necessary and I can see a potential for a serious malfunction in this new format.
Whether or not Spielman was the right man for the job I agree 100% that a GM was necessary to move the team forward.The part that I feel will cause problems is that Spielman does not have complete control over the coach and the coaching staff.
Why is this a problem? Lets take a look at how the process works.
Spielman is now in charge of building the roster to be more stable than it was under Childress and to keep the team stocked with competitive talent year after year. Normally what would happen is the GM would have a vision that would be shared by the owner on how the team would look, what kind of schemes they would run, and what talent they would bring in to fit that set of standards.
However, Spielman has no direct power over the coaching staff and Frazier reports to Wilf, not Spielman. This can create tension and potential subordination issues. Now I can see where we may have problems with Spielman bringing talent to fit his vision of how he wants the team to look and Frazier not wanting that talent because he has a different vision of what he wants the talent he has to do.
And in the end, when the time comes that the players do not fit what the coaches want talent wise, the coaches will not be as effective or productive.
It seems to me that the only right way to set Spielman up to succeed is to give him the power to control both the players and the coaching staff rather than splitting up the accountability like they have it now.
And in the end we still have a Triangle Of Authority in that Wilf still controls the coach, Spielman controls the roster and Frazier controls the coaching staff. It seems more like a managerial circle jerk than a formula for SB success.
Bookmarks