Kevin Barnes might be a beast undercover

[Rajmahal33]

obviously the FO is accountable to the organization (and by extension to the fans) but what i'm saying is why do so many fans blindly take the word of the "pundits" over the personnel employed to draft specifically for this team. It's like every decision that the FO makes is questioned and by default is categorized as being a bonehead move. But any two-bit sportswriter can give their opinion about a specific move and everyone immediately takes that to be gospel. No one ever questions about whether the pundits are wrong about this guy.

Look at the very least we shouldn't arbitrarily be considering a pick to be a disaster or annointing someone before these guys have played a single down of football. I think the whole concept of grading a draft/pick before seeing the on-field product is preposterous...

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Rajmahal33

obviously the FO is accountable to the organization (and by extension to the fans) but what i'm saying is why do so many fans blindly take the word of the "pundits" over the personnel employed to draft specifically for this team. It's like every decision that the FO makes is questioned and by default is categorized as being a bonehead move. But any two-bit sportswriter can give their opinion about a specific move and everyone immediately takes that to be gospel. No one ever questions about whether the pundits are wrong about this guy.

Look at the very least we shouldn't arbitrarily be considering a pick to be a disaster or annointing someone before these guys have played a single down of football. I think the whole concept of grading a draft/pick before seeing the on-field product is preposterous...

Good post.

Just to add I think it's safe to say the team scouts know much more about these guys than the so called experts. So yeah it does seem dumb to take the word of some draft expert over the team who has invested hours upon hours on researching these players.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Rajmahal33

obviously the FO is accountable to the organization (and by extension to the fans) but what i'm saying is why do so many fans blindly take the word of the "pundits" over the personnel employed to draft specifically for this team. It's like every decision that the FO makes is questioned and by default is categorized as being a bonehead move. But any two-bit sportswriter can give their opinion about a specific move and everyone immediately takes that to be gospel. No one ever questions about whether the pundits are wrong about this guy.

Look at the very least we shouldn't arbitrarily be considering a pick to be a disaster or annointing someone before these guys have played a single down of football. I think the whole concept of grading a draft/pick before seeing the on-field product is preposterous...

Do better than 76-84 over ten years and maybe the FO won't look so boneheaded.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Do better than 76-84 over ten years and maybe the FO won't look so boneheaded.

Cop out answer I think. Our record over the past 10 years is not on the FO alone.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Cop out answer I think. Our record over the past 10 years is not on the FO alone.

Well you can't say that you lost individual games because of the FO so much, but it's their responsibility to make sure that they have the players and personnel in place to generate wins. It's that way in all of business, which football is one.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Well you can't say that you lost individual games because of the FO so much, but it's their responsibility to make sure that they have the players and personnel in place to generate wins. It's that way in all of business, which football is one.

True, I was just saying how blaming everything on the FO (i.e. the whole record example) is a cop out answer to argument that our scouts probably know better than the pundits.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Cop out answer I think. Our record over the past 10 years is not on the FO alone.

A cop out? How so? Last time I checked success was determined by wins and losses. The people in the front office along with Dan Snyder are the ones most directly responisble for assembling the talent we have on the field and the coaching staff which directs them. That talent has been able to muster a 7-9 season average over the last ten years.

If somebody is assigned the task of hiring a staff to run an office, and the staff turns out to be completely unqualified and consistently doesn't produce results, who is ultimately to blame?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

A cop out? How so? Last time I checked success was determined by wins and losses. The people in the front office along with Dan Snyder are the ones most directly responisble for assembling the talent we have on the field and the coaching staff which directs them. That talent has been able to muster a 7-9 season average over the last ten years.

If somebody is assigned the task of hiring a staff to run an office, and the staff turns out to be completely unqualified and consistently doesn't produce results, who is ultimately to blame?

Ok then, how do you measure the success of a sport pundit then? If the argument is that our FO scouts probably know more than these sports pundits.

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Ok then, how do you measure the success of a sport pundit then? If the argument is that our FO scouts probably know more than these sports pundits.

You measure the success of sports pundits based on
1. Home many copies of their book sold in the 1st week.
2. The size of their bonus when signing with their employers.

You certainly don't base it on expertise....cowherd fans.