Former Colts GM Ryan Grigson lands with Hawks

[pittpnthrs]

This kind of makes a little sense, but other than that, I still dont want Grigson lending his opinions to any decisions being made.

https://12thmanrising.com/2018/06/13/se ... on-reason/

 

[Seymour]

Clearly those that have protested so carelessly don't comprehend what a consultant is and what they are brought in to do.

The Seahawks have previously employed consultants. The new hire recently provided consulting services in Cleveland. Prior consulting examples are in the archives to see and read. And yet, laziness blocks the comprehension of the careless protester. The knee jerk reaction is to question the decision and decision makers. The reality is that it is a failure in comprehension that lies within the lazy complainer.

Great points! Yes, I'll be the first to admit that I have no comprehension of what a consultant does. Could you please take the time to educate me on that after you feed me breakfast? :roll:

Everyone has a choice. If you want to know, do the work.

Why bother? The guy was fired from his last 2 jobs (lasted 1 year with Cleveland as senior personnel executive). The only worthy advising he is qualified for is possibly the best moving company to use. But, I would tripple check that too.

His missteps with the Colts included trading a first-round pick in 2013 to the Browns for Trent Richardson only to cut the running back two years later after he failed to make an impact, and failing to address Indianapolis' offensive line needs in a timely fashion.

Grigson didn't make a full commitment to improve the offensive line until the 2016 draft, when the Colts used half of their eight picks on linemen. That commitment came only after Luck missed nine games because of injury in 2015.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Why bother? The guy was fired from his last 2 jobs (lasted 1 year with Cleveland as senior personnel executive). The only worthy advising he is qualified for is possibly the best moving company to use. But, I would tripple check that too.

Pretty much. Guy got canned from the Colts with 3 years remaining on his contract and then got canned from the freaking Browns and we're happy to have him? OK

 

[Seymour]

Why bother? The guy was fired from his last 2 jobs (lasted 1 year with Cleveland as senior personnel executive). The only worthy advising he is qualified for is possibly the best moving company to use. But, I would tripple check that too.

Pretty much. Guy got canned from the Colts with 3 years remaining on his contract and then got canned from the freaking Browns and we're happy to have him? OK

Correction. Jville is happy to have him.

 

[Jville]

This kind of makes a little sense, but other than that, I still dont want Grigson lending his opinions to any decisions being made.

https://12thmanrising.com/2018/06/13/se ... on-reason/

If your truly interested in further insight into Grigson's new role with the Seahawks, you might consider looking into Scot McCloughan's previous role as a consultant with the Seahawks and other NFL teams.

 

[jammerhawk]

Here's another viewpoint on Grigson:

http://seahawksdraftblog.com/some-much- ... erspective

Complain if you want, but the FO has been pretty astute in getting things done as all sorts of teams around the league keep picking up members of the Seahawks FO.

 

[ivotuk]

Quoting a quote from Rob's blog:

He joined the Eagles as a regional scout in 2003 and gradually moved up the ladder from regional scout, to director of college scouting and eventually to director of player personnel, the job he had held for the past two seasons.

“He has been a great adviser to me and somebody I have leaned on to bounce ideas off of many times over my career,”

Eagles GM Howie Roseman said in a statement. “He leaves no stone left unturned in his efforts to find good players and we were lucky to have him here in Philadelphia.”

That’s Howie Roseman, the guy receiving widespread praise for building a Super Bowl winning Eagles roster in two years.

 

[Seymour]

Similar statements were made about Tom Cable when he was hired. I refuse to look past the "what have you done lately" facts myself (just like I did when I objected to the Cable hire)....but that is me.

 

[pittpnthrs]

This kind of makes a little sense, but other than that, I still dont want Grigson lending his opinions to any decisions being made.

https://12thmanrising.com/2018/06/13/se ... on-reason/

If your truly interested in further insight into Grigson's new role with the Seahawks, you might consider looking into Scot McCloughan's previous role as a consultant with the Seahawks and other NFL teams.

McCloughan has a history of evaluating talent and getting good to great results. Grigson hasent done squat in 7 or so years except being fired by two of the worst franchises in the NFL. He's in the Seahawks organization, so now he's supposed to be good? We cant even say to look back at his previous success because anything positive has been so long ago that its irrelevant now. The organization is in a critical stage right now and the fact that they signed a bum like Grigson is a head scratcher to say the least.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Here's another viewpoint on Grigson:
complain if you want, but the FO has been pretty astute in getting things done as all sorts of team aroundd the league keep picking up members of the Seahawks FO.

Then why are we letting them go and settling on guys like Ryan Grigson?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Do you ever have something positive to say about the Hawks? Just curious :mrgreen:

 

[pittpnthrs]

So they pick up one of the worst FO people in the NFL currently and you want me to find something nice to say about it? How are you happy about this is my question?

 

[jammerhawk]

Because the team won't stand in the way of a FO member getting a better job and as such are able to have regular line-up of folks want to improve themselves working here.

Grigson was voted NFL executive of the year by the whole league, as such he probably is a whole lot better than some here would acknowledge. he apparently wants to be here and JS & Co want him here. That's good enough for me.

Nobody is telling anyone what they should think here but this guy is far from being a bum, as alleged by some here. Let's get some perspective with respect to this situation. Think what you want, and say whatever you want, I just disagree and think the wholly negative viewpoint is unreasonably negative.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Well, he isn't that fat guy with the goblet that destroyed our first Super Bowl team and more than anyone else, is responsible for why Walter Jones has no ring.

That is a positive.

But the issue I have with second chances is that you lose the ability to find someone that deserves a first chance.

And it was not just his decisions. Yes, he made terrible decisions as a GM based on his roster record.

But he compounded it by being a jerk. He was a toxic personality in the clubhouse, by many accounts.

So we are taking this massive chance that he is not going to make things unpleasant for others there.

At least with Scot, he might have been difficult to get along with (or drunk, I have no idea) but he had exceptional results - especially with juxtaposed with the cost.

This guy has terrible results AND might be a complete jerk.

BUT he isn't Ruskell. So I suppose that is a positive....is that better?

 

[jammerhawk]

Perhaps time will tell, he may be terrible or he may help the FO. Suspecting only the worst is a pessimistic viewpoint.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Some people just want to see the negative in everything. Do you, it's all good :irishdrinkers:

 

[Seymour]

Perhaps time will tell, he may be terrible or he may help the FO. Suspecting only the worst is a pessimistic viewpoint.

That depends on the situation IMO. Turning a blind eye to red flags and downward trends can become a disaster and destroy a team also. Which do we have the most recent experience seeing happen here?

For the record, I am "fairly" content with this years draft at this early stage, and believe we could be getting back on track. But I also believe that this is a crucial time for Pete and this organization and it could easily go either way. That is why I am closely watching all moves myself.

 

[hawknation2018]

People getting their panties in a bunch over this is funny.

We hired a former GM in a minor advisory role within the front office.

 

[hawknation2018]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/1006936512984854528[/tweet]

Well said. :lol:

 

[pittpnthrs]

Grigson was voted NFL executive of the year by the whole league, as such he probably is a whole lot better than some here would acknowledge.

And he's been fired twice since then. The same team he received that award with, thought so much of him that they got rid of him with 3 years left on his contract. He then goes to a team that didnt win a single game last season and when the dust settled, they didnt want him either. Why do we?

he apparently wants to be here and JS & Co want him here. That's good enough for me.

Of course he wants to be here, we're the only organization willing to offer him a paycheck. JS & Co have been making a lot of questionable decisions the past 3 or so years and this looks like another one. You cant expect fans to not wonder and question this move.