Nick Underhill: Saints Might Not Move on from DA (1 Viewer)

Previous Next
I don't know why anyone is surprised by this after Dennis Allen excused the whole season due to injuries........even though we were 2-3 with Carr and a relatively healthy team.
 
DaveXA said:
Gayle is undoubtedly involved in personnel decisions when it involves key personnel, including HC, GM and other FO positions. Heck, she personally met with Watson at one point during that whole deal.
Click to expand...

I think you are giving Gayle Benson too much credit. Meeting with a player doesn't mean she's involved in personnel decisions.
 
So, are we giving Dennis Lauscha a pass on this mess? Isn't he Mickey's boss, or am I not understanding the Saints front office heirarchy?

BTW, if Lauscha is Loomis' boss, I'm not giving Lauscha a pass. He should be pressuring Loomis to can Allen. Zero accountability anywhere right now, from the players all the way up to ownership.
 
SystemShock said:
I think you are giving Gayle Benson too much credit. Meeting with a player doesn't mean she's involved in personnel decisions.
Click to expand...
Not directly, but it's certainly not hard to draw a conclusion that she's not as distant as a few people claim she is.

And ultimately, it's her decision how the money gets spent because she does own the team and does consult with Dennis Lauscha and probably others when making key personnel decisions. I can't see why anyone would doubt that.
 
SystemShock said:
I think you are giving Gayle Benson too much credit. Meeting with a player doesn't mean she's involved in personnel decisions.
Click to expand...

No, but it means that she is involved and knows what is going on with the team. I'm sure she defers to the people she hired to make personnel decisions but she clearly wanted to meet and vet the guy that they wanted her to pay hundreds of million of dollars to and she was willing to be a part of the recruiting team trying to get Watson to come to the Saints. And she may have had something to do with the Saints not being willing to guarantee the entire contract the way Cleveland did.
 
DaveXA said:
Not directly, but it's certainly not hard to draw a conclusion that she's not as distant as a few people claim she is.

And ultimately, it's her decision how the money gets spent because she does own the team and does consult with Dennis Lauscha and probably others when making key personnel decisions. I can't see why anyone would doubt that.
Click to expand...

I just don’t understand what Mrs. Benson is doing so differently than 28 to 30 of the other owners that has people reaching this conclusion.

Are other teams owners out there lighting into their front office executives or coach publicly? No. Only a small handful of guys operate that way, and ironically they’re owners of teams that have been pretty moribund.

People are acting like this is our third straight 2-6 start or something. This truly is the first absolute “stinker” season and everyone is expecting the owner to come out guns ablazing to show she cares?

I don’t understand the expectations here. I know it’s been a long time since our team has been bad to this degree, but the behavior they’re looking for from ownership isn’t how most owners operate in these situations.

They have people hired to handle these football related things, and when it comes time to make a decision on those hires, they get talked about and handled behind closed doors.

We have a long tenured, 23+ year GM. We aren’t going to just fire him or blast him through the media the way people want him to be. As emotional as people are, the guy is going to get his due respect with how it is handled if they decide to make a move.
 
DaveXA said:
Not directly, but it's certainly not hard to draw a conclusion that she's not as distant as a few people claim she is.

And ultimately, it's her decision how the money gets spent because she does own the team and does consult with Dennis Lauscha and probably others when making key personnel decisions. I can't see why anyone would doubt that.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get into this too much, but it is easier to draw a conclusion that she is not involved at all.
 
St. Widge said:
No, but it means that she is involved and knows what is going on with the team. I'm sure she defers to the people she hired to make personnel decisions but she clearly wanted to meet and vet the guy that they wanted her to pay hundreds of million of dollars to and she was willing to be a part of the recruiting team trying to get Watson to come to the Saints. And she may have had something to do with the Saints not being willing to guarantee the entire contract the way Cleveland did.
Click to expand...
Or it could mean that Loomis asked her to do it for optics.
 
SystemShock said:
Or it could mean that Loomis asked her to do it for optics.
Click to expand...
There are more than a handful of well documented occasions where Gayle has demonstrated her surrport for the team and the organization. Just feels like people are being unjustifiably cynical about her role as owner.

And it really doesn't matter how the meeting came about. She showed up for it and that's good enough for me.
 
SystemShock said:
I'm not going to get into this too much, but it is easier to draw a conclusion that she is not involved at all.
Click to expand...

Based on what? What makes her different from every other owner of a struggling team not named Jerry Jones and how they’re operating?

This reads like “I need someone to be mad at so I am going to make up this fantasy in my head that she does nothing so that it can be her.”
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Previous Next

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

    Share this page

     

    Twitter

    Back
    Top Bottom