- Banned
- #1
Swimmer
Medsamust Saint Fan
Offline
We were a foot away from this board being ecstatic and talking about all the great moves in the turnaround - at least for a week. But this loss did finally release some posters who know NFL pretty good to post some tough insights. EJW's historical analysis of bad moves by the FO over the past 4 years should become the standard for Saints FO effectiveness reference.
Jim Finks was the best NFL and CFL franchise turnaround specialist in history: Bears, Vikes, Saints and I think Stampeders (Guillermo?). So what was his strategy
1) He rarely made dramatic moves the 1st year, preferring to get to know 1st hand what the real franchise problems were. With the Saints, he hired Mora 1st year, but he had Mora hand-picked from the UFL whenever Finks made his next move.
2) We wouldn't be in cap hell. I suspect the Pats learned some from Finks. Finks was often described as being cheap by his peers. But he definitely believed in "selling high and buying low." He let a number of our star LBs go instead of paying the inflated open market value
3) He built his FO with professional, expereinced NFL executives. He gave his coaches say in all matters, but the GM ran the team.
4) He built strong defenses as fast as possible believing championships were won with defense and great defenses made-up for a lot of mistakes of the offense. He built depth in the front 7 of his defenses over time. On offense he wanted ball control running game and No turnovers.
5) He never reached for the 1 or 2 great FAs who might help the team turnaround overnight. He simply wasn't going to pay a premium.
These are just a few of his fundamental tenets for building winning organizations of Finks. So I'll take a stab at some of his analysis of the current Saints. Here's some of my hunches:
- After analyzing the team, he would realize the team had no professional FO and the team was being run by the head coach
- He would realize the team had one of the great offensive minds as head coach. However, he would also realize that this head coach had something systemically wrong in his defensive strategy and defensive player acquisition pipelines
- He would likely realize the head coach poorly hired defensive coaches and hung-on to them under performing way too long
- He would realize we had one of the great Leaders and QBs of all-time in Brees, but that his best days were numbered.
- He would cringe at what he would consider expensive, reckless, spontaneous near desperation FA moves. To him, this would be a base fundamental problem that had to be changed. Paying 20%-25% of Talent Budget on players who no longer play for the team would be insanity to him. That means there was no room for error in drafts and FAs as well as not enough money for talent depth on defense and the O-line.
Please disagree or add to any of the points above.
But mostly I am asking the board members to express the specific moves they think Finks would do to turnaround this team. Go for it. Most of us are in "emotional" mode since that Dagger to Heart Loss Sunday. Hopefully, by trying to look through Finks eyes, we may collectively start to be able to think about moves from a Big Picture, Long-Term success view. Or what would Bellicheck do?
Jim Finks was the best NFL and CFL franchise turnaround specialist in history: Bears, Vikes, Saints and I think Stampeders (Guillermo?). So what was his strategy
1) He rarely made dramatic moves the 1st year, preferring to get to know 1st hand what the real franchise problems were. With the Saints, he hired Mora 1st year, but he had Mora hand-picked from the UFL whenever Finks made his next move.
2) We wouldn't be in cap hell. I suspect the Pats learned some from Finks. Finks was often described as being cheap by his peers. But he definitely believed in "selling high and buying low." He let a number of our star LBs go instead of paying the inflated open market value
3) He built his FO with professional, expereinced NFL executives. He gave his coaches say in all matters, but the GM ran the team.
4) He built strong defenses as fast as possible believing championships were won with defense and great defenses made-up for a lot of mistakes of the offense. He built depth in the front 7 of his defenses over time. On offense he wanted ball control running game and No turnovers.
5) He never reached for the 1 or 2 great FAs who might help the team turnaround overnight. He simply wasn't going to pay a premium.
These are just a few of his fundamental tenets for building winning organizations of Finks. So I'll take a stab at some of his analysis of the current Saints. Here's some of my hunches:
- After analyzing the team, he would realize the team had no professional FO and the team was being run by the head coach
- He would realize the team had one of the great offensive minds as head coach. However, he would also realize that this head coach had something systemically wrong in his defensive strategy and defensive player acquisition pipelines
- He would likely realize the head coach poorly hired defensive coaches and hung-on to them under performing way too long
- He would realize we had one of the great Leaders and QBs of all-time in Brees, but that his best days were numbered.
- He would cringe at what he would consider expensive, reckless, spontaneous near desperation FA moves. To him, this would be a base fundamental problem that had to be changed. Paying 20%-25% of Talent Budget on players who no longer play for the team would be insanity to him. That means there was no room for error in drafts and FAs as well as not enough money for talent depth on defense and the O-line.
Please disagree or add to any of the points above.
But mostly I am asking the board members to express the specific moves they think Finks would do to turnaround this team. Go for it. Most of us are in "emotional" mode since that Dagger to Heart Loss Sunday. Hopefully, by trying to look through Finks eyes, we may collectively start to be able to think about moves from a Big Picture, Long-Term success view. Or what would Bellicheck do?