Why haven't we re-hired Scott Mcgloughlin?

[King Dog]

McGloughlin seems to be available. Let's be honest, our drafts have been far from home runs since he left. This guy is aces when it comes to scouting college talent.... I would love to see him back here.

If he is still hitting the sauce too hard, just hire him as a 1099 employee.

He's on another level from anything we currently have on staff.

 

[jammerhawk]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

He'd help JS if he was here but needs to be demonstrably sober all the time.

 

[chris98251]

McGloughlin seems to be available. Let's be honest, our drafts have been far from home runs since he left. This guy is aces when it comes to scouting college talent.... I would love to see him back here.

If he is still hitting the sauce too hard, just hire him as a 1099 employee.

He's on another level from anything we currently have on staff.

He would have to want a NFL job first, second he has his scouting service back in business again now also, which means the Seahawks can hire him as a contractor scout evaluator if they want.

 

[BullHawk33]

McGloughlin seems to be available. Let's be honest, our drafts have been far from home runs since he left. This guy is aces when it comes to scouting college talent.... I would love to see him back here.

If he is still hitting the sauce too hard, just hire him as a 1099 employee.

He's on another level from anything we currently have on staff.

He would have to want a NFL job first, second he has his scouting service back in business again now also, which means the Seahawks can hire him as a contractor scout evaluator if they want.

It also means they don't really have to announce when he is working for the Seahawks. Maybe he is doing some work for them...

 

[Popeyejones]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

Did a quick count and the Seahawks have 27 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team during McCloughan's three year tenure there, and 2 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team in the four years since he's left (Jimmy G as an alternate last year, and Lockett as a KR the year before).

That's not perfect a perfect measurement by any means and I think McGloughan gets too much credit (instead, the draft is just a crap shoot and the Seahawks had a historic and unreproducible hot streak while he was there), but many years out now it's impossible to argue that the 2013 and 2014 drafts weren't incredibly weak, with 2015 and 2016 still yet to produce any high quality starters (Frank Clark is a damn fine situational pass rusher to be sure, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up as a high quality or better starter).

 

[hawknation2017]

From 2010-12, Pete Carroll was running the whole show. He came to Seattle with the intent of both coaching and making personnel decisions. After the 2012 draft, Carroll realized it was impossible to do both.

There just was not enough time in the day to study these new players entering the draft whom he was not already familiar with from recruiting them out of high school and playing against them in college while he coaching at USC. John Schneider had also earned Carroll's trust with how hard he pushed to draft undersized QB Russell Wilson in 2012.

There has been a bit of a learning curve with that transition of personnel authority from Carroll to Schneider. However, on the aggregate, no team has come close to drafting as well as the Seahawks from 2010 to the present:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... e21b25e399

The draft classes in 2015 (Tyler Lockett, Frank Clark, & Mark Glowinski) and 2016 (Jarran Reed, Germaine Ifedi, & Rees Odhiambo) were both above average, per Approximate Value metrics. The 2014 class took more time to bear fruit: Justin Britt was the crown jewel of the 2014 class, but Paul Richardson & Cassius Marsh are also coming off good years, so we should see the AV of this class rise a bit more over time.

 

[kidhawk]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

Did a quick count and the Seahawks have 27 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team during McCloughan's three year tenure there, and 2 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team in the four years since he's left (Jimmy G as an alternate last year, and Lockett as a KR the year before).

That's not perfect a perfect measurement by any means and I think McGloughan gets too much credit (instead, the draft is just a crap shoot and the Seahawks had a historic and unreproducible hot streak while he was there), but many years out now it's impossible to argue that the 2013 and 2014 drafts weren't incredibly weak, with 2015 and 2016 still yet to produce any high quality starters (Frank Clark is a damn fine situational pass rusher to be sure, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up as a high quality or better starter).

The problem with this type of analysis is it leaves out just how difficult it would be to actually have very many more pro bowlers on the same team. Realistically, as long as we have the pro bowlers we have currently on our roster it's going to be tough to add many more. This is due to multiple factors. One is money...you can only afford so much pro bowl level talent and pro bowl rookies aren't that common. Two, New players would need to get more playing time, and with a lot of positions already entrenched with high quality players, it leaves little room. Three, Pro Bowl voting is really only going to allow so many from any given team at any given time.

 

[StoneCold]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

Did a quick count and the Seahawks have 27 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team during McCloughan's three year tenure there, and 2 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team in the four years since he's left (Jimmy G as an alternate last year, and Lockett as a KR the year before).

That's not perfect a perfect measurement by any means and I think McGloughan gets too much credit (instead, the draft is just a crap shoot and the Seahawks had a historic and unreproducible hot streak while he was there), but many years out now it's impossible to argue that the 2013 and 2014 drafts weren't incredibly weak, with 2015 and 2016 still yet to produce any high quality starters (Frank Clark is a damn fine situational pass rusher to be sure, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up as a high quality or better starter).

I think those numbers are high because those were the first drafts of the Pete era and anyone after the first 3 years has to unseat a starter. How many kids in the draft are better than Earl, Kam, Sherm, Wags, Russell. Could be those years were better a better overall draft pool. Not saying the guy doesn't know talent, but...

 

[hawknation2017]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

Did a quick count and the Seahawks have 27 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team during McCloughan's three year tenure there, and 2 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team in the four years since he's left (Jimmy G as an alternate last year, and Lockett as a KR the year before).

That's not perfect a perfect measurement by any means and I think McGloughan gets too much credit (instead, the draft is just a crap shoot and the Seahawks had a historic and unreproducible hot streak while he was there), but many years out now it's impossible to argue that the 2013 and 2014 drafts weren't incredibly weak, with 2015 and 2016 still yet to produce any high quality starters (Frank Clark is a damn fine situational pass rusher to be sure, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up as a high quality or better starter).

The problem with this type of analysis is it leaves out just how difficult it would be to actually have very many more pro bowlers on the same team. Realistically, as long as we have the pro bowlers we have currently on our roster it's going to be tough to add many more. This is due to multiple factors. One is money...you can only afford so much pro bowl level talent and pro bowl rookies aren't that common. Two, New players would need to get more playing time, and with a lot of positions already entrenched with high quality players, it leaves little room. Three, Pro Bowl voting is really only going to allow so many from any given team at any given time.

Also, the more Pro Bowl talent you already have, the lower you will likely be picking in the draft. Which is why the only objective way to evaluate a class is based on how individual players performed over time against the expectation of their draft position.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... -story#SEA

 

[mrt144]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

Did a quick count and the Seahawks have 27 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team during McCloughan's three year tenure there, and 2 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team in the four years since he's left (Jimmy G as an alternate last year, and Lockett as a KR the year before).

That's not perfect a perfect measurement by any means and I think McGloughan gets too much credit (instead, the draft is just a crap shoot and the Seahawks had a historic and unreproducible hot streak while he was there), but many years out now it's impossible to argue that the 2013 and 2014 drafts weren't incredibly weak, with 2015 and 2016 still yet to produce any high quality starters (Frank Clark is a damn fine situational pass rusher to be sure, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up as a high quality or better starter).

It's hard for me to say the draft is an entire crap shoot except for the most marginal of participants in the draft at GM. There are varying degrees of skill in talent evaluation that justify ongoing employment.

 

[kidhawk]

Agree he's a talented personnel assessor, but disagree with the conclusion the drafts have been weak since he left.

Did a quick count and the Seahawks have 27 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team during McCloughan's three year tenure there, and 2 Pro-Bowl appearances from players drafted or brought to the team in the four years since he's left (Jimmy G as an alternate last year, and Lockett as a KR the year before).

That's not perfect a perfect measurement by any means and I think McGloughan gets too much credit (instead, the draft is just a crap shoot and the Seahawks had a historic and unreproducible hot streak while he was there), but many years out now it's impossible to argue that the 2013 and 2014 drafts weren't incredibly weak, with 2015 and 2016 still yet to produce any high quality starters (Frank Clark is a damn fine situational pass rusher to be sure, and I'd be surprised if he doesn't end up as a high quality or better starter).

The problem with this type of analysis is it leaves out just how difficult it would be to actually have very many more pro bowlers on the same team. Realistically, as long as we have the pro bowlers we have currently on our roster it's going to be tough to add many more. This is due to multiple factors. One is money...you can only afford so much pro bowl level talent and pro bowl rookies aren't that common. Two, New players would need to get more playing time, and with a lot of positions already entrenched with high quality players, it leaves little room. Three, Pro Bowl voting is really only going to allow so many from any given team at any given time.

Also, the more Pro Bowl talent you already have, the lower you will likely be picking in the draft. Which is why the only objective way to evaluate a class is based on how individual players performed over time against the expectation of their draft position.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... -story#SEA

This is very true...we could also add that pro bowl appearances will add up over time, so appearances vs pro bowl picks is a totally different stat. Also, Winning more regular season games adds to your hype and gets you more pro bowlers. We haven't exactly been out there pounding out 13+ wins every year.

 

[Popeyejones]

The problem with this type of analysis is it leaves out just how difficult it would be to actually have very many more pro bowlers on the same team. Realistically, as long as we have the pro bowlers we have currently on our roster it's going to be tough to add many more. This is due to multiple factors. One is money...you can only afford so much pro bowl level talent and pro bowl rookies aren't that common. Two, New players would need to get more playing time, and with a lot of positions already entrenched with high quality players, it leaves little room. Three, Pro Bowl voting is really only going to allow so many from any given team at any given time.

Yeah, totally understand the logic here, and think it has validity. The place where it fails I think, is that you really can't even (YET) find any high quality starters from the four drafts since he left (not including this last one for obvious reasons). I get that it's hard to supplant pro-bowlers, but that the Seahawks are too dominant across all 22 positions to even draft high quality starters doesn't really hold water. (Again, Clark seems to be a special player as a situational pass rusher so far and I'd guess he'll develop into a high quality starter. Reed might do so too, and so on, but across four years there's just not any guys you can point to who have done it yet).

I think those numbers are high because those were the first drafts of the Pete era and anyone after the first 3 years has to unseat a starter. How many kids in the draft are better than Earl, Kam, Sherm, Wags, Russell. Could be those years were better a better overall draft pool. Not saying the guy doesn't know talent, but...

Yep, kind of a variation on Kidhawk's post. Over the last four years it's not like there's a massive shortage of drafted players (taken after the Hawks' 1st pick of each draft) who are better than all five starting o-lineman, whoever their trying to paste into CB 2 and CB 3 these days, the empty hole at SLB, the fine but nothing special two interior rusher spots, WR 2 and WR 3, and RB. That's 13 positions right there in which there have been jobs for the taking for which draft picks and FA acquisitions over the last four years (not including this draft) have yet to comfortably pan out and lock themselves in as high quality starters.

It's hard for me to say the draft is an entire crap shoot except for the most marginal of participants in the draft at GM. There are varying degrees of skill in talent evaluation that justify ongoing employment.

Yeah, we probably just differ on this. I'm of the mind that 32 full time experts backed up 20-30 more experts each and who are all dedicating millions of dollars in resources into an INCREDIBLY high variance parlor game basically more or less turn that game into a game of chance. More than fair to say that there's some elements to it that aren't chance, but IMO we're talking an incredibly slim margin on that.

This is very true...we could also add that pro bowl appearances will add up over time, so appearances vs pro bowl picks is a totally different stat.

Yep. 100% agreed, and what I was thinking of to, and why I said what I did is "not a perfect measurement by any means."

If someone wanted to do it you'd take the class from four years out and pair them with the class from eight years out and then count up each of their pro-bowl appearances in their first four years. Then you do the same for three years and seven years out in their first three years, two years out and six years out in their first two years, and then 1 and 5.

I cut the corner of doing that (it would have taken a TON more time) cuz I think the point is just easily proven with the much quicker counting and math, and well, TBH, because even if I did it people would still object to it for all the reasons (save for this one) they're objecting to the easier to derive number.

Someone should do that though. I'd be curious to see the result (you'd still have two on the right side, but less than 27 on the left, whatever that number is). :2thumbs:

 

[kidhawk]

And of course, we can actually see what he actually accomplished outside the Seahawks organization and count how many pro bowlers he drafted while with the Redskins while we are at it....I would say there is a lot more to this equation than is being made out in this thread.

 

[hawknation2017]

The place where it fails I think, is that you really can't even (YET) find any high quality starters from the four drafts since he left (not including this last one for obvious reasons). I get that it's hard to supplant pro-bowlers, but that the Seahawks are too dominant across all 22 positions to even draft high quality starters doesn't really hold water. (Again, Clark seems to be a special player as a situational pass rusher so far and I'd guess he'll develop into a high quality starter. Reed might do so too, and so on, but across four years there's just not any guys you can point to who have done it yet).

Justin Britt is not a high-quality starter, according to you? LOL. Britt was a Pro Bowl alternate last year and just received a contract extension making him one of the highest paid centers in the league.

I also don't know why you keep saying Clark was the only high-value player from the 2015 draft class. To continue to ignore Tyler Lockett, who has already been named to a Pro Bowl & All-Pro team as a returner, while putting up insane efficiency numbers as a WR, makes it seem like you are being intentionally obtuse.

 

[northseahawk]

It's all Pete. His college experience and familiarity with the players the fist few years was the reason we got gems in drafts

 

[Jville]

Thru out the years of this current era, both Pete Carroll and John Schneider have been up front about how Seahawk draft criterion changes from draft to draft. Some Seahawk fans, who have followed along, have an understanding of that history of changing draft criterion. Others are oblivious. After all, the annual media and expert obsession with which team had the best draft blinds most fans as to how well their favorite team satisfied specific draft criterion in any given year.

Pete Carroll and John Schneider have been transparent about changing draft criterion. All that is required of Seahawk fans, who want to understand team decisions, is the ability to listen with comprehension.

 

[Popeyejones]

And of course, we can actually see what he actually accomplished outside the Seahawks organization and count how many pro bowlers he drafted while with the Redskins while we are at it....I would say there is a lot more to this equation than is being made out in this thread.

...or the 49ers, in which he led some of the best and some of the worst drafts for them across the last few decades.

100% agreed with (what I think) is your sentiment on that.

FWIW I think he has a deserved reputation as a good talent evaluator. People who talk about him as if he's some kind of magician who is only held down by personal demons take that WAY TOO FAR though, IMO.

 

[kobebryant]

He's living in Colorado and seems pretty content being his own boss, and working as often or as little as he wants with his scouting service.

 

[kidhawk]

And of course, we can actually see what he actually accomplished outside the Seahawks organization and count how many pro bowlers he drafted while with the Redskins while we are at it....I would say there is a lot more to this equation than is being made out in this thread.

...or the 49ers, in which he led some of the best and some of the worst drafts for them across the last few decades.

100% agreed with (what I think) is your sentiment on that.

FWIW I think he has a deserved reputation as a good talent evaluator. People who talk about him as if he's some kind of magician who is only held down by personal demons take that WAY TOO FAR though, IMO.

I think here we can come to a consensus

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

John did contact him right away: https://www.profootballrumors.com/2017/ ... n-seahawks

It's important to remember, that Scot resigned in 2014 from Seattle. With two weeks before the draft. Schneider and Scot are and remain friends. But clearly there was reason/cause for him departing the team that was pretty serious based on the ill timing of his leaving.

It doesn't have to be something on Seattle's end preventing a reunion here. It appears that at the least, John reached out as a friend to offer support for him. It's possible they discussed what his future plans are. Is he even juiced up enough to get back into the NFL grind? In his year off, he admittedly enjoyed being a mercenary scout for the league. He's still highly qualified in that area. And there isn't the same kind of oversight, drama or scrutiny being your own contractor for hire boss.

Scot has reprised that role and may just opt to do that instead going forward. Such a situation doesn't preclude John from hiring him or involving him in the process either.

It may take a year or more before he gets that itch again. But clearly Scot has struggled with the structure and scrutiny of a paid position relative to his ongoing struggles with substance addiction. And those struggles clearly continued with him in Washington. I'd be shocked if John isn't keeping tabs on him and when he feels he's ready -- will go to bat for him to reunite in Seattle. What kind of expectations/restrictions would the Seahawks require is anyone's guess. It'd be understandable for them to want some kinds of protections to avoid another 11th hour defection leading up to the draft. Although to be fair, Seattle generally sets their boards very early in the process (prior to the Combine). So much of the heavy lifting is already done in February.