Welcome to the News Editorial section of PackerChatters.com where you will find Green Bay Packers news updates throughout the year. Packer fans editorial's, pre and post game reports, draft talk and more.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Thoughts on GM/HC
I'm not an official league guy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Let's imagine the possibilities if there is a change made in GM/HC.
First of all, let's imagine that Harlan decides to relieve Sherman of his head coaching duties, and let him move full-time to GM. It's not unbelievable. Sherman is fantastic at charts and spreadsheets...and it just might seem like the move to make without making a drastic change.
However, it is Harlan's modus operandi to let the GM choose his coach. One of the knocks on MS has been his over-loyalty to his staff. Someone brought up in the other posts that, instead of bringing in someone from the outside, he's be more likely to promote someone from his staff or close to him.
If the atmosphere of the team is one of the problems, I don't see this helping. MM got upset over the minutia of the replacing of Donatell. Can you imagine the players, already disgruntled from losing, seeing which coordinator or postion coach gets promoted. Or, *shudder* it could even be Vince Tobin.
So, there's the rub. If Harlan let's MS stay on as GM, the wailing and gnashing of teeth will still be for change in the coaching staff. Will Sherman have the guts to go away from his safety zone and make the big decisions? From my experience watching him, no.
So, let's go the other way. Let's say that Harlan hired a GM and has MS stay as head coach. The GM, technically, should have control over the coaches and whether or not he stays.
One thing that always got me was how easily Holmgren let Sherman come to the Packers. I mean, he could have fought, or offered him more money (he sure could have).
It reminded me of the Sherm Lewis hypocrisy. For years and years, Holmgren touted Lewis as a great coach. Yet, when the opening came here, he wasn't even interviewed, and then, Holmgren didn't even scoop him up in Seattle after he was fired along with Rhodes.
Sooooo...is Sherman really valued by the Holmgren crew? If Mike Reinfeldt, for example, was brought over as GM, would he put up with Sherman?
On the other hand, Sherman's drafts have been highly criticized (as were the late Wolf drafts). Could having a intuitive GM making those picks, making the personnel moves, and letting Sherman play "good cop" work out?
My thoughts are "not soon enough".
I'm not a Sherman hater in the least. I think he's a great guy. I really liked Lindy Infante, too. I remember being quite upset watching the last episode of the "Lindy Infante Show", where LI was a class act and did his last show after he was terminated (his wife appeared on the show with him).
Just because, though, someone is well-liked, even respected, and acknowledged as a smart guy, doesn't mean keeping them on is the best course.
I state that if the job was to be divvied up...it should have happened last offseason, at the latest. If this season continues as it has the past five games, though, given the scenarios above, I just don't see Sherman fitting in anymore. It's too bad, because I think he could have easily transitioned when the team was winning. Now that we're losing, he's gonna get as much scrutiny as BJ Sander whenever he punts.
The Detroit game is going to define a lot this year, as is each game following (Cowboys, Redskins). Wouldn't you say that they Pack needs to win 2 out of 3 before the bye to preserve any "hope"? If they win one, they are 2-6 going into the bye, and a .500 season will be nearly impossible.
I think that bye week is going to be a long week for Mike Sherman. I think that might be the week Harlan has a chat with him, and we go from there.