BB's GM Role

[PaulThePat]

Apologies if this is a daft question, but I'm not someone whose paid a lot of attention to GMs over the last 40 years. As such I'm kinda unsure what they do. More importantly what is it BB does that any new GM would take away?

To me it just feels like someone to do BB's paperwork. He'll still be making the decisions. Therefore what is the point?

Would a new GM actually change the decisions we make?
Would it make us a better team?

It feels like a direction we need to move in but as long as BB is around I'm not sure what practical difference it will make to our chances of winning.

 

[jmt57]

Apologies if this is a daft question, but I'm not someone whose paid a lot of attention to GMs over the last 40 years. As such I'm kinda unsure what they do. More importantly what is it BB does that any new GM would take away?

To me it just feels like someone to do BB's paperwork. He'll still be making the decisions. Therefore what is the point?

Would a new GM actually change the decisions we make?
Would it make us a better team?

It feels like a direction we need to move in but as long as BB is around I'm not sure what practical difference it will make to our chances of winning.

Typically a GM is going to handle contract negotiations, player transactions (trades, cuts, signings) and the draft. Normally that is a collaboration, based on input from the Director of Pro Personnel, Director of College Scouting, OC, DC, and of course the HC.

The major sticking point is who has the final say - the HC or GM?
(Think back to Parcells and his "'If they want you to cook the dinner, at least they ought to let you shop for some of the groceries" comment.)

Many here believe that if Belichick stays on as HC, he is still going to have final say on personnel decisions (or at minimum have an outsized influenceon those decisions) - resulting in nothing meaningful will have changed.

 

[PaulThePat]

The major sticking point is who has the final say - the HC or GM?

Does the GM actually make the draft choices - or at least have "serious" input/last say in some places? I just can't imagine that ever happening with BB.

 

[upstater1]

Apologies if this is a daft question, but I'm not someone whose paid a lot of attention to GMs over the last 40 years. As such I'm kinda unsure what they do. More importantly what is it BB does that any new GM would take away?

To me it just feels like someone to do BB's paperwork. He'll still be making the decisions. Therefore what is the point?

Would a new GM actually change the decisions we make?
Would it make us a better team?

It feels like a direction we need to move in but as long as BB is around I'm not sure what practical difference it will make to our chances of winning.

It's a question of who makes the ultimate choice. Who gets final say?

All GMs confer with their coaches and they draft according to scheme.

But who decides to take Tyquan over Thornton. Clearly the Patriots had intel (likely on the Steelers) because they jumped the Steelers to take him. So who made that decision?

I think this is the main difference.

I don't think another GM with full control would've targeted other positions or used the resources we expended in a different way. It's more a matter of targeting the right player.

And I don't mean doing this all retrospectively (ie. we should've taken Nacua in the 6th rd! Or, we should not have taken Mac but waited until the 7th to take Purdy!!!"). But in the case of Tyquan, there was a clear comparison between Pickens and him.

 

[upstater1]

Does the GM actually make the draft choices - or at least have "serious" input/last say in some places? I just can't imagine that ever happening with BB.

I can.

Belichick hasn't scouted some of these guys. If the scouts/personnel guys insisted, I am sure Belichick went with their recommendation.

But there's a difference here in that Belichick also got to make other huge decisions during the draft, which a GM with power would make from here on in.

For instance, the Mapu pick. Belichick and the Patriot coaches got to see him up close (didn't Covington coach one of the minor all-star games where Mapu turned heads?). They targeted Mapu. They were definitely going to pick him. The problem was that, when it was their turn to pick in the 3rd round, no one wanted to trade down with them for an extra pick. They are on record as telling the Boston media that they reached for Mapu, who was likely a 4th round pick. But they wanted him so badly that they grabbed him a round too early because no other player compelled him. That's a Belichick decision. I don't think a GM would do it in the same way.

 

[upstater1]

Here's a GM question for everyone: is there any advantage to having your coach be in charge of personnel?

Here's one I can think of: the Patriots signed Godchaux precisely because the Patriots O-linemen like Thuney and Shaq Mason reported to Belichick that he was the most difficult DT to move. He had uncanny strength compared to everyone else. They played against him and thought he was a rock back there. Godchaux was not highly sought after by the scout community, he doesn't jump out at you on film, his name is barely ever called out by the announcers, and really, the guy can't run at all. But he is like Keith Traylor back there.

If the HC is not tuned into personnel and scouting, is he going to carry this information from his players to the GM? I tend to doubt it. Not if he's in coaching mode and personnel is just an afterthought. So Shaq reports to him that Godchaux is impressive. If the HC isn't involved in scouting or personnel, he's going to be like, "That's nice. He plays for the other team." He'll leave it at that.

 

[jmt57]

Here's a GM question for everyone: is there any advantage to having your coach be in charge of personnel?

I am of the mindset that the answer to that is no.

I do want the GM and HC to communicate effectively in terms of the offensive and defensive scheme the HC wants to employ, so that the GM can then go out and find the personnel that fit, and build the roster based on that. The HC and GM have to be on the same page, but there is still room for debate among the top front office. If only one voice makes all the decisions, then what is the point of having those other positions?

My preference would be for the HC to focus on his own roster, to self-scout, and to study opponents and their tendencies. Let the GM, the Director of Pro Personnel, the Director of College Scouting and their staffs focus on finding talent that is not currently on the team's roster. I would prefer that each do their own jobs in-depth rather than risk spreading one person too thin, and only getting a superficial viewpoint.

 

[PaulThePat]

Thanks folks, some good insight there. Appreciated