Its a pretty important point to raise. There is a lot of ambiguity, and there are a lot of parties with conflicting interests. Its difficult for any outside observer to figure out the processes in place.
What's more, armed with the knowledge that Jeff Ireland overrode Joe Philbin on keeping Richie Incognito, that argument is clearly bull****. Sent from my GT-P3110 using Tapatalk
I feel that it's clear enough with knowledge we have from various sources to understand it. Ireland brings them in the door with contact suggestions in a vacuum and Aponte handles them in the broader context of organizational philosophy. Tannehill, for example, was essentially guaranteed a certain range of money which Ireland was willing to give. Aponte delayed this because of the organization's ideals in regard to the offset. Sent from my GT-P3110 using Tapatalk
I don't think this is true at all. I think that in the rush to try and discover the infinitely possible, eminently deniable and completely unproveable details of "what actually has happened", you end up losing the forest for the trees in terms of RESPONSIBILITY. Responsibility isn't about the details of who said or suggested what and when. It isn't, oh well Jonathan Martin was Adam Engroff's guy not Jeff Ireland's guy. Responsibility is about who had overarching authority to direct the situation at his or her discretion at any time. Jeff Ireland has that authority, and therefore that responsibility. A famous Harry Truman quote comes to mind.
Right, but there is still a process to it. Did Jeff Ireland choose Tannehill on his own? We know that Ross has said that they hired outside consultants to evaluate the QBs in the draft. Who's decision was it to hire those consultants? Who chose the consultants to be hired? How much of an influence did the coaching staff have in identifying Tannehill? Its a pot of gumbo, and we are left to try and identify the ingredients, and how much of each ingredient is in the pot. The LB situation is a great example as well. Was the decision to release Burnett and Dansby made exclusive of the decision on whom would be replacing them? Its possible that Philbin wanted them released, despite Ireland's warning that it would result in a downgrade. Its also possible that Philbin only agreed to releasing them because Ireland came to him and said that he thinks he could upgrade the talent at the position. Its possible that Dawn Aponte straight up told everyone that there is too much money being spent on LBs, and they had to cut those costs. Knowledge of the process is imperative to deciphering whom is responsible for what. Sure, we can definitively say that the LBs were downgraded this season. But beyond that its basically throwing darts, with a small amount of third-party hearsay and anonymous leaks. The only real evidence available is what the team publicly states, and what we saw on Hard Knocks, and even then a lot of it is without context.
There is no ambiguity. Who is the GM? That's it. There is nothing left to debate. Only on a message board will we debate abstract existential topics like, "what does 'authority' really mean ..." Someone pass me a joint. As for Ireland/Parcells why is it one or the other? Why not both? Team sources said during the 2-3 years he was more engaged, Ireland and Parcells only disagreed once or twice, and yes Parcells overruled him. But out of hundreds of personnel decisions they barely disagreed. They were lockstep.
I'm not sure how any of these things are eminently deniable, or completely unproveable. All the vested parties have all the information available to determine exactly what happened.
You really can't be this intellectually lazy. A billion dollar enterprise, and you have a guy making $1-2MM per year with apparently total authority?
A better way to say it: responsibility is not blame. Too many people are concerned about who is to blame—the person who made the evaluation that led to the selection—and not enough about responsibility—who bears the burden of the bad decision and reaps the rewards of the good decision. You can blame Tony Sparano and Dave DeGuglielmo for John Jerry, but responsibility for him goes to the personnel department, whoever you think was running it at the time.
It is amazing how academic your thinking is. Yes, the general manager has responsibility over personnel. It's written into his contract. This is public knowledge.
So did the Fords and they kept Matt Millen around. Because the decision makers make a decision, it doesn't automatically mean it is the right decision.
And a product manager at Apple has authority over development of the iPhone. That doesn't mean he can put any components his heart desires into it.
Lol!!! Did I miss this? Did Jeff Ireland try to sell the team??? EDIT: By your reasoning, nobody in any organization other than the team owner has any authority. And if the organization is publicly owned forget about it.
Exactly. There's that whole story about how Sparano and DeGuglielmo coached John Jerry at the Senior Bowl and came away thinking he is smart enough to play left guard, then after drafting him they tried him at left guard for like a day or two and DeGuglielmo said during meetings that Jerry can't play there. Sure if you're caught up in all the details and the blame game you can say well John Jerry is Dave DeGuglielmo's fault. Except Dave DeGuglielmo wasn't responsible for the decision to draft John Jerry. Yes when Gugs' contract is up and you have to make an evaluation of how valuable an assistant he is, that story will carry some weight in the evaluation. But he still wasn't responsible for drafting John Jerry. Any General Manager should have an appreciation for what input you can trust and what input you can't trust. That doesn't mean you should never be fooled. They're all fooled at some point. But a wiser GM could have very well known that Gugs was outkicking his coverage when he starts claiming based on a few days of practices that a guy with Jerry's history at Ole Miss can do this or that. Or maybe not. Maybe that wiser GM just wouldn't have been all that high on Jerry in the first place and therefore the input doesn't matter. Either way, that GM is responsible for the decision.
My equity management team manages upwards of $5 billion of client assets. We buy the wrong stock, we can lose $50 to $100 million of client money, just like that. None of the managers makes $1 million a year or even close to it. Maybe all five of us combined might make that. Maybe. The post above is supposed to just try and scare people off with big numbers, without giving proper context.
You think Ross or Aponte is picking the players? See how well that goes. Jeff makes the decisions on personnel. Aponte makes the contract happen. Aponte is not going to overrule Ireland on talent. Jeff isn't going to say I want Matt Ryan and Aponte will step in and say forget it, we're taking Jake Long. Can the big boss overrule little boss? Yes. Doesn't mean little boss doesn't make 99 decisions before the 100th is overruled. Lest you forget: Ireland has final authority over the talent assembled on the roster. Period point blank. There are 53 guys, Ireland is responsible for all 53. Is there a 54th or 55th he might have wanted instead but due to contract negotiations he wasn't able to procure? Sure. But nobody on this team is overruling Ireland based on talent.
Evaluating the talent is one part of the process. Its a very important part, but its is not the entire process. You literally just said that Jeff Ireland can be overruled?
Your management team has full control over that money? They could decide to invest it in penny stocks if they choose? What ist he scope of their authority, and decision making process?
I'd say it's the most important part. I said he won't be overruled on talent. President Obama can overrule any one in the military doesn't mean nobody has authority to bomb the sh** out of a village in the middle east.
The product manager at Apple doesn't have final say written into his contract. He doesn't even have a contract. Jeff Ireland does.
Umm, yeah, unless they restricted themselves (since I don't know which fund CK works for or it's structure). As someone who drafted an RIA's Form ADV and hedge fund offering, yes.
Nobody here even knew when Ireland was extended. I have a hard time believing that they know the details of the contract. And again, there is evidence suggesting that Jeff Ireland does not have final say, see: contract negotiations with Ryan Tannehill.
I see it now. You're carrying on with this protracted debate because you don't have a full understanding of what final say means.
http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sport...-over-miami-dolphins-personnel-decisions.html Waiting for what interesting convoluted argument you'll come up with to discredit the words coming out of the mouth of the guy signing the contract.
I understand how big of a draw I am in debates here. But if we want to make this a Stringer Bell debate, you'll have to try and petition a Stringer Bell subforum.
OK, thanks for revealing that you don't actually do any research—as if the academic answers you give in response to real world situations doesn't already reveal that. Back in late 2007/early 2008, when Jeff Ireland was hired, there was a concern as to whether or not he would have true final say under Bill Parcells as befitting the title of General Manager. NFL teams can block personnel from leaving to a lesser or lateral position; meaning, if you want to hire a team's offensive coordinator to be your offensive coordinator, his current team can say no. But if you want to hire that team's OC to be your head coach, his current team can't say no; they have to let him go. The same applies to GMs. The Dolphins satisfied the NFL league office that Jeff Ireland's position in Miami would be a promotion over his then-current job in Dallas (essentially director of scouting). Additionally, it was reported after Bill Parcells' abrupt departure in 2010 that Jeff Ireland's contract contained a clause giving him final say over personnel. Whether or not that clause was added by Parcells just before he left, or whether that clause existed since his hiring, is up for debate. Regardless, it exists, and no amount of deflection from you in the form of unrelated academic scenarios can change that fact. Jeff Ireland has ultimate authority over the Miami Dolphins roster because his contract says he does. Period. Your ignorance of this fact does not make it false, it simply makes you ignorant of a crucial fact.
A. This pretty much agrees with everything I've been saying. Its a collaborative effort. B. You've already stated that Jeff Ireland can be overruled, and thus does not have final authority.
It's not up for debate Desides. I listed it above. He had final say back in 2008. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/dolphins/2008-01-03-cameron-fired_N.htm He also said it again in 2012. It's safe to say he's always had it, and still has it. Richie Incognito was here because of Jeff Ireland.
Jeff Ireland is definitely not under the same contract he was when Parcells was here. The Miami Dolphins have expliclty stated that Dawn Aponte is the chief contract negotiator. That inherently means Jeff Ireland cannot sign a player unless Dawn Aponte signs of.
An appellate judge can overrule a superior court judge. Therefore no SC judge has judgment power. A state supreme court can overrule an appellate judge. So appellate judges have no judgment power. SCOTUS can overrule state supreme courts, so they have no judgment power. Legislature can overrule SCOTUS decisions, so SCOTUS has no judgment power. President can veto Congress, so congress has no final legislative power. But congress can overrule the President right back, so the president doesn't have any executive power. The people can un-elect them all, so nobody has any power anywhere. ^^^ is your argument taken to it's ridiculous conclusions. I'd like to present your strawman by the way. Here he is: Nobody has said final authority. Nobody but you. We are discussing final say over personnel decisions. And Ireland has it. It's in his contract. EDIT: And while I was typing, you piled more straw on it: You know exactly what final say over personnel means. Means nobody is added to the team that Jeff Ireland doesn't pick. He doesn't get all of his picks, but nobody is added to the team without Ireland saying yes. NOBODY. Aponte and Ross are not going behind Ireland's back and adding a player. Ireland isn't going to wake up to a text that says Ross just added Mike Wallace to the team.
