Head Coach if there is no GM change (2 Viewers)

[Nolan]

Unless this poster has access to every single hot candidates’ desires, way of thinking, how much they’re willing to budge to finally obtain their dream job they’ve worked extremely hard for, how much money means to them, etc, then this post’s premise is indeed conjecture. Forum respect and past posts don’t change that.

And let me be clear…there is nothing wrong with that! But if someone clearly labels something as an opinion, then gives an opinion I disagree strongly with, I am going to express it, regardless of who said it.

It could have been Underhill, Sean Payton, or whoever that said it…I just don’t agree with all these candidates are going to turn their noses up at a NFL HC job offer.

I don't doubt that we'll be able to land a promising coach. There will be someone who wants to prove themselves regardless of our circumstance.

I think you're missing the major point, though, it's that Loomis' stubborn and controlling approach will not be attractive to coaches who want roster control. The idea that a proven insider, who has inside access to this organization, is basing his opinion of Loomis on a "SR Witch Hunt" is kinda crazy to me. But whatever you think. There was no "SR Witch Hunt" of Loomis when he started dropping information with concerns of Loomis last year, was there? Yet you think he's just randomly hopping on some forum bandwagon?

 

[St. Geezy]

I don't doubt that we'll be able to land a promising coach. There will be someone who wants to prove themselves regardless of our circumstance.

I think you're missing the major point, though, it's that Loomis' stubborn and controlling approach will not be attractive to coaches who want roster control. The idea that a proven insider, who has inside access to this organization, is basing his opinion of Loomis on a "SR Witch Hunt" is kinda crazy to me. But whatever you think. There was no "SR Witch Hunt" of Loomis when he started dropping information with concerns with Loomis last year, was there? Yet you think he's just randomly hopping on some forum bandwagon?

Just because an insider has an opinion on something doesn’t make it gospel. If he said something along the lines of “I am hearing…” I would have taken it differently and not even question it, but he clearly didn’t. These are his opinions, and he made this quite clear.

Mickey Loomis is not stubborn and controlling with his HCs. Not sure where that’s even coming from.

Sorry, but the vibe I am getting from a certain select few posters here are that “ML is the enemy and that is to be defended at all costs and anyone that says different is the actual enemy.” If I incorrectly assumed Max was in that group, so be it, but don’t tell me I have to honor an anonymous poster’s OPINION as gospel just because of who they are, especially when I myself have my own level of insight.

 

[St. Widge]

I don't doubt that we'll be able to land a promising coach. There will be someone who wants to prove themselves regardless of our circumstance.

I think you're missing the major point, though, it's that Loomis' stubborn and controlling approach will not be attractive to coaches who want roster control. The idea that a proven insider, who has inside access to this organization, is basing his opinion of Loomis on a "SR Witch Hunt" is kinda crazy to me. But whatever you think. There was no "SR Witch Hunt" of Loomis when he started dropping information with concerns of Loomis last year, was there? Yet you think he's just randomly hopping on some forum bandwagon?

Here is the thing. Do you think Loomis should have trusted Dennis Allen to make personnel decision and give him full control over the team? I don't even think he should have been coaching the team much less have full control over personnel decisions and the football side. Had Loomis done that, I think that alone should get him fired.

I would prefer if Loomis moved on and we got a new young GM and maybe Loomis did take control away from DA, but nobody, no matter how connected, can tell you if it was due to him having a giant out of control ego or if he just didn't trust DA to do those things.

So, while I would prefer Loomis to move on, he has given full control to a HC if they show that they deserve to have that control the way Payton did. Hopefully we get a HC that deserves to have control.

I also think it's dangerous to think that because someone has inside information, most of which turned out to be true, that their opinion is necessarily more correct than any other. Clearly Max has inside information but he also has opinions. We should be careful to separate the two.

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

IMO if there is no move in the front office we will hire a Head Coach that had no possible other options to be a NFL Head Coach.

Think someone like Joe Brady.

People like that. I think if Aaron Glenn had options like the Jets or Saints for example he would pick the Jets. If there are no options left then he would come here.

Head Coach and General Manager is a marriage of sorts or like having a business partner. It’s hard to create alignment with your business partner if they are near the end of their career and you’re in your prime.

Our General Manager is knocking on the door of 70 years old. Real Head Coaches w real options know this is a problem and they also want real control.

This setup is how we got DA. He was never going to get another chance. DA was also willing to cede control.

We need an alpha dog Head Coach and we won’t get it under these conditions.

What is an 'alpha dog' head coach?

 

[St. Geezy]

Here is the thing. Do you think Loomis should have trusted Dennis Allen to make personnel decision and give him full control over the team? I don't even think he should have been coaching the team much less have full control over personnel decisions and the football side. Had Loomis done that, I think that alone should get him fired.

I would prefer if Loomis moved on and we got a new young GM and maybe Loomis did take control away from DA, but nobody, no matter how connected, can tell you if it was due to him having a giant out of control ego or if he just didn't trust DA to do those things.

So, while I would prefer Loomis to move on, he has given full control to a HC if they show that they deserve to have that control the way Payton did. Hopefully we get a HC that deserves to have control.

I also think it's dangerous to think that because someone has inside information, most of which turned out to be true, that their opinion is necessarily more correct than any other. Clearly Max has inside information but he also has opinions. We should be careful to separate the two.

Did I miss some sort of report about ML controlling personnel over DA? I had not heard of this. It is my understanding that it was and remains a collaborative effort between ML, the HC, Director of Pro Personnel and Director of College Scouting. Would love to see where this is coming from though.

ML is more of a CEO, overseer type GM, or at least had been.

 

[Nolan]

Just because an insider has an opinion on something doesn’t make it gospel. If he said something along the lines of “I am hearing…” I would have taken it differently and not even question it, but he clearly didn’t. These are his opinions, and he made this quite clear.

Mickey Loomis is not stubborn and controlling with his HCs. Not sure where that’s even coming from.

Sorry, but the vibe I am getting from a certain select few posters here are that “ML is the enemy and that is to be defended at all costs and anyone that says different is the actual enemy.” If I incorrectly assumed Max was in that group, so be it, but don’t tell me I have to honor an anonymous poster’s OPINION as gospel just because of who they are, especially when I myself have my own level of insight.

I'm not saying anyone is the enemy. I have my opinion about Loomis, and you have yours. We are allowed to disagree. I'm also not suggesting that you (or anyone) have to take the posters word as gospel; if you read my first post, I was simply pointing out that based on historical data he's not grasping at air to form a hypothetical out of thin air or jumping on a witch hunt like you suggested. I had no idea if you knew he was an insider or not. Not every post needs to be taken as an attack.

 

[St. Widge]

Did I miss some sort of report about ML controlling personnel over DA? I had not heard of this. It is my understanding that it was and remains a collaborative effort between ML, the HC, Director of Pro Personnel and Director of College Scouting. Would love to see where this is coming from though.

ML is more of a CEO, overseer type GM, or at least had been.

I think you are right. I was just assuming that for purposes of argument. At the same point, it wouldn't surprise me if at some point Loomis decided that DA would have less of a voice than a guy like Payton who had earned the right to have a larger say.

 

[St. Geezy]

I'm not saying anyone is the enemy. I have my opinion about Loomis, and you have yours. I'm also not suggesting that you (or anyone) have to take the posters word as gospel; if you read my first post, I was simply pointing out that based on historical data he's not grasping at air to form a hypothetical out of thin air or jumping on a witch hunt like you suggested. I had no idea if you knew he was an insider or not. Not every post needs to be taken as an attack.

I have seen him post things before, yes, but as St. Widge suggested, I did not take this as anything that warranted credence based on who said it. There is indeed a need to separate insight from opinions.

There was an indication that this was an opinion/conjecture (“IMO”), then there was an “If” he provided and a scenario, which formed his hypothetical, and I made my opinion on his conjecture and created hypothetical known.

I felt he created a scenario and negative hypothetical and it was just the latest jab at ML. It’s okay to be upset with the guy over his results or whatever, but to now also start making up potential scenarios to be mad at him about to me is just wrong, and as I put, silly.

 

[Saint KayBee]

My belief is that the Saints have a coordinator in mind from a team that will be in the playoffs (and is projected to make a deep run), and since the front office will have to delay interviewing said candidate until his team is eliminated from the playoffs, the Pessimism Posse will interpret the delay as “nobody wants to coach here” as the team conducts interviews with other candidates it has no immediate plan or intent to hire. The Posse will slam the candidates whom the team don’t plan to hire and will spend days beating their chests about it. Then the well-regarded head coach candidate will come aboard and the tone will change.

 

[Andrus]

Never called him an ignorant dumbarse. Literally read his post as conjecture. I just don’t agree with the assessment and still believe it is based on the official SR forum witch hunt of Mickey Loomis.

Didn’t mean to offend but sorry if I don’t agree with something just because “RebelMax” said it.

When a poster says something is their opinion, that’s what I take it as, not some insider knowledge.

I just don’t believe that we are going to be left with the scrap heap because of who our GM is.

No, you didn't say he was an ignorant dumbarse, but that is how your initial post came off. Whether or not his post was his opinion doesn't matter, it was the scoffing, dismissive & rude nature of your initial response that I took issue with.

 

[St. Geezy]

exactly my point.

since my end of page post seems to have been missed. Stop with the insults.

Whatever my guy. You are the LAST person that needs to be advising anyone on this.

 

[St. Geezy]

No, you didn't say he was an ignorant dumbarse, but that is how your initial post came off. Whether or not his post was his opinion doesn't matter, it was the scoffing, dismissive & rude nature of your initial response that I took issue with.

Sorry didn’t mean to be this way. I’ve seen far worse on this forum, especially when it comes to defending Saints personnel, but apparently it’s open season on ML. I get the drift.

 

[St. Geezy]

literally every time you have an issue with another poster... since me... has been you hurling insults... so thank you for proving me right the first time I had an issue with you.

Pot calling kettle black. You’re only going in this direction because you are the number 1 Loomis hater on this forum and will defend anyone saying he’s awful. You also love ganging up and using every opportunity you have to put the things you do and behavior you display onto others.

 

[St. Geezy]

literally every time you have an issue with another poster... since me... has been you hurling insults because you ASSUMED you knew where they were coming from... so thank you for proving me right the first time I had an issue with you. OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

Sorry for assuming someone was giving an opinion when they said “IMO.” My mistake.

Where are these “insults” I have hurled??? Just because I think an opinionated hypothetical based on conjecture and being used to incite more hatred onto Loomis is silly?