Tag Archives: NFL Scouting

Notes from the All-Star Trail, Part II — Jan. 2018

26 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

I spent Sunday through Wednesday in Mobile this week for the Senior Bowl. It’s always the best week of the year, the game’s ‘outdoor party.’ Everyone from around the game is there, and it’s a relaxed atmosphere. What’s more, the people of Mobile are hospitable and engaging and the hotel staff is excellent.

Here are a few stories, observations and items from Mobile.

  • I know a lot of people who read this blog are hoping to work in the NFL someday. If you do — or if you just want to go to the game to see what all the fuss is about — make sure you’re there Monday to Thursday. Scouts start showing up Monday night and leave Wednesday or Thursday, and most agents follow them. It always amazes me when people who should know better arrive Thursday and leave after the game. By Thursday, the show is ending.
  • Here’s a story from this week’s game. A player was strolling through the lobby of the Renaissance Riverview Plaza Hotel when he stopped briefly to talk to a financial advisor. He was immediately confronted by a scout who claimed he’d sent four texts to the player requesting an interview. After the player acknowledged that he’d received the texts, the exasperated scout asked why he hadn’t responded. The player essentially responded with a shrug. This is a prospect with fifth- to sixth-round grades, yet when he slides out of the draft this spring, he’ll likely blame his agent.
  • There were four players — Southern Miss OH Ito Smith, Troy QB Brandon Silvers, Kansas St. WO Byron Pringle and Florida St. SS Nate Andrews — represented by rookie agents. In a business where the richest agencies continue to get richer, it’s refreshing to see newer contract advisors getting a chance.
  • We’ve got four former NFL scouts lined up to provide a panel of experts at our 2018 ITL Combine Seminar, set for Wednesday, Feb. 28, in Indianapolis. We’ll have more details next week. For now, we’re still finalizing our lineup and locking down our venue. We think it’s going to be very special for everyone interested in scouting and evaluation.
  • I asked a scout who attended the Senior Bowl this year about the talent level, which was criticized by many this year. Here was his response: “There were . . . 30 players who declined invites for various reasons. Take the 90 juniors (who left last year and were drafted or signed post-draft), plus the 30 seniors who did not show up, and you have a lot of players who will be drafted in the first three rounds. The Senior Bowl is now a bowl game with a lot of mid-round and lower draft choices.” That’s sad, but it’s a sign of the times.
  • By the way, we’ll have a detailed look at the players who had the best week as judged by the ITL Scouting Department (made up of former NFL scouts) in today’s Friday Wrap, which will be out this evening. It’s free, and you can sign up for it here.

Notes from the All-Star Trail — Jan. 2018

12 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by in Agents, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

January is always a crazy time for me. On one hand, it’s the best time of the year because I get to get out and see all the people I text and email the other 11 months of the year. On the other, it’s incredibly busy, with so much information to gather and publish. And it’s tough being away from the family for almost the whole month.

Today, though, let’s focus on the positives. Here are a few thoughts gathered from conversations I’ve had through Week 1 of my annual Amuck in America tour.

  • On Tuesday, a couple of agents asked me if scouts would be sticking around until Wednesday, the third day of workouts at the College Gridiron Showcase in Addison, Texas. I knew why they were asking — their clients were looking to skip Wednesday’s workout, with the excuse that no NFL teams would be there. What’s frustrating is that though I’m super-proud of our game, we (the organizers of the game) are not at a point where we have a roster full of first-rounders. These kids need to play every chance they get, even if it impresses only a handful of people. When players immediately start asking if they can skip workouts, it makes me wonder if they love football. And if you’re not a Top 100 prospect, you really need to exude a love of football.
  • Today I had a long conversation with a financial advisor who, after years of pursuing NFL clients, gave it up this year. I called him to pick his brain about what makes it so hard to succeed in the game, and along the way, he shared something with me that I hadn’t thought of. There was a time, he said, when he’d discuss his NFLPA certification openly with his clients, but no more. Now he has to pick his spots because the cache is gone, and it’s all because of — you guessed it — the decision by so many players to kneel during the anthem. He works with plenty of retired and pre-retired professionals from an older generation, and while they accept the players’ actions intellectually, it’s difficult to stomach on an emotional level. That’s something I hadn’t thought of: that, to some degree, the NFL has become so toxic that it’s splashing on the non-football business of some people in the game. That’s not good.
  • Lately I’ve been mulling joining the Pro Football Writers of America. It doesn’t really benefit me, per se, and I don’t really think of myself as ‘media’ in the traditional sense, but I’ve been kicking it around. At any rate, it got me thinking — why isn’t there a professional organization for current, former and aspiring NFL scouts? Why isn’t there a body that rewards and honors scouts that excel, or helps gather information on the profession, or even helps show the ropes to those who want to work for NFL teams some day? It’s something I’ve been mulling for a while now. Think it’s a good idea? A dumb one? Would you be interested if I started such a society? Hit me up on Twitter (@InsideTheLeague) with your ideas.

Ask The Scouts: How Do Injuries Affect Draft Status?

29 Friday Sep 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

It has been a while since the last entry in our Ask The Scouts series, so we thought we’d pose an interesting question to our friends in the business and get their responses. This week, we asked about the impact of medical history on draft status:

How many prospects would you say are either (a) lowered down the draft board or (b) marked as almost undraftable, simply due to injuries/health rather than ability? 

Here are a few responses.

  • “Probably about 100.”
  • “I would say guys that are affected by injuries yearly would be in the 40-50 range, as far as losing value due to them. Think we might end up with around 15 on he average being completely off the board, then 30-35 might lose some value.”
  • “I would be afraid to take a wild guess. That is usually done right before the draft by the medical staffs and players vary from team to team. Player A may be off the board for one team but on the board for another according to what their doctors say.”
  • “My guess would be 20-25%, maybe 33%,of prospects have some type of physical issue that needs to be considered in determining ultimate value. Any prospect that has had a major surgery is tagged. Any prospect that has games missed in multiple seasons is tagged even though they may be minor surgeries. Those prospects who get hurt this year who will be unable to be full speed for mini-camps are also tagged.”

This turned out to be a productive question that garnered many responses. We’ve got several more responses in our Friday Wrap, which goes out to about 4,000 people in the football world — agents, scouts (and ex-scouts), financial advisors, active NFL players, prospects and their parents, and many others associated with the game.

It’s totally free, and it comes out (surprise, surprise) every Friday afternoon. Interested in receiving it? Sign up here. And welcome aboard!

Scouts on Scouting: Kebric, Kingdon Answer Our Questions (Pt. 3)

21 Thursday Sep 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Today, we offer the final segment of our three-part series with former Raiders scouts Jon Kingdon and Bruce Kebric,  two of the co-authors of Al Davis: Behind the Raiders Shield.

Do you think Al Davis would follow the trend of hiring young people with minimal football background or would he seek more experienced scouts for his staff?

Kingdon: Outside of Ron Wolf, Bruce Kebric and myself, the scouting department was primarily comprised of former players so I imagine he would have continued that process.

Kebric: No. He wanted experience and expertise.

What’s the biggest mistake a team can make in scouting and evaluation?

Kingdon: It’s important that a scout have a conviction in his opinions. I worked with a scout that would change his grade from a second round to a seventh round to a third round depending on what was the latest report that he heard. It’s a lot easier to defend your own opinion than someone else’s. A scout needs to be strong enough to admit when he is wrong and strong enough to admit when he is right. You can’t be afraid to make mistakes. Scouting is the process of humans evaluating humans so by definition, you are going to be wrong sometimes. Just learn from your mistakes. If you make a mistake, make it a mistake of commission, not omission.

Kebric: Hiring friends and “yes” people. You need people who do the work, stand up for their convictions, but are willing to admit a mistake. The best advice that I ever received came from a veteran coach who  early on in my career said, “Believe your eyes, not your ears.”

The spread offense has created challenges for scouts, especially when it comes to evaluating the OL and QBs. How would Al have dealt with this challenge?

Kingdon: Scouting is scouting. Probably the same issues came up when teams were running the wishbone, wing T and run and shoot offenses.

Kebric: I think that the lack of patience more than the collegiate offenses is the primary problem. Players at these two positions are immediately put on the field today instead of being given two or three years to learn the NFL game.  I watch Aaron Rodgers and wonder what his career would have been like if he had been forced to play immediately.  Everyone wants instant success.  Years ago, teams had three- and five-year plans; now it is one and two.  My first two years with the Oilers, our record was 2-26.  The next two it was 17-11 and then it was on to “Luv Ya Blue.”  Do you think we would have been around for Year 3 today?

In Al’s final days with the Raiders, the team didn’t enjoy a lot of success. The same could be said for a lot of the game’s legends (Beathard, Landry, others). Is there a shelf life for success in the NFL? 

Kingdon: There’s no way to come up with a palatable answer to this question.

Kebric: Merely a lack of patience on Al’s part. His mounting health problems created a desire for instant success and as the book mentions, he never recovered from the loss in the 2003 Super Bowl. Al won three championships with two coaches over a 19-year period. After that, he was making near bi-annual changes with both his head coaches and the offensive scheme (Vertical vs. West Coast).

Scouts on Scouting: Ex-Raiders evaluators Kebric, Kingdon Answer Our Questions

20 Wednesday Sep 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

On Tuesday, two of the co-authors of the new book, Al Davis: Behind the Raiders Shield, Jon Kingdon and Bruce Kebric, answered our questions about the book and about scouting in general. We had a few more questions, and their answers are below.

Did Al evaluate scouts and front office personnel? If so, how?

Kingdon: In his own way, Al would evaluate the scouts.  He would rely more on the opinion of the better scouts in the department. He was very loyal to his employees and did not fire people easily. If someone proved to be disloyal to him or the organization, that was certainly grounds for termination. The coaches were a different story.

Kebric: He did know who could perform and who could not but remained loyal to certain individuals. On a number of occasions, he would tell us just to “work around so and so.”  Of course, this created a burden on the rest of us.

Al was an innovator. How would he look at the rise of analytics in the game today?

Kingdon: I once heard a historian talk about the greatness of our founding fathers like Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison and Adams.  They wrote this amazing document using quill pens in bad light. It would be amazing to think what they could do with the facilities of today. I think the same think about Sid Gillman, Al Davis and the other great football minds that would sit in a room, cutting and splicing film as they put together their offenses.  I’m sure that Al would have analyzed the analytics from all angles and perspectives and found a way to maximize its use in ways that may not have been considered.

Kebric: Perhaps, because of his health decline, Al did not adapt to modern devices (e.g., computers, cell phones, etc.).  He remained reliant upon daily faxes and used an overhead projector to detail particulars of the Lane Kiffin firing. I once made mention to him about all the data that could be located on a computer and he replied that, “Jon Kingdon provides me with that information.” The book contains a comment from Al to the effect that history repeats itself and that what worked in the past once again will work in the future.  He never really left the 1960s (Sid Gilllman’s vertical passing offense, etc.) and so, analytics would have been a tough sell.

Thursday, we ask Jon and Bruce the biggest mistake a team can make during the scouting process; how they think Davis would have dealt with evaluating players in college offenses that don’t translate to the NFL; and why some scouts and executives lose their effectiveness over time. Don’t forget to check in tomorrow, and make sure to check out their new book.

 

Two Ex-Raider Scouts, Now Authors, Reflect on Al Davis and the Game

19 Tuesday Sep 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

If you read our weekly Friday Wrap (and if you don’t, you can register for it here), you know that there’s a new book out called Al Davis: Behind the Raiders Shield. It’s written by Bay Area sportswriter Steve Corkran along with two men who knew Davis well: former Raiders scouts Jon Kingdon and Bruce Kebric. Also, Gary Peterson served as editor.

I’ve known Jon since the late ’00s in my days running all-star games, but only recently met Bruce (and his friendly and engaging wife, Liz). They’re both promoting the book around the Bay Area and nationally, so I took the opportunity to ask both of them a few questions about past Raiders drafts, as well as the scouting business. They were kind enough to spend a little time answering those questions, and we’ll have them for our readers this week. Here’s the first excerpt.

Looking back to your four decades with the Raiders, which draftee’s success (or failure) surprised you the most?

Kingdon: The late-round picks that make it are always the most satisfying. Ron Wolf getting the team to draft (DT) Reggie Kinlaw, who had a very good career and (who was) dominating in the Super Bowl win versus Washington. La’Roi Glover, another defensive tackle, who we battled to draft and went on to a great career. Unfortunately, it was done with the New Orleans Saints.  Another was Ronald Curry who was a quarterback out of North Carolina that we tried as a safety and then went on to become a very fine wide receiver.

Kebric: As stated in the book, the players that we did not draft (Brett Favre, Aeneas Williams, Steven Jackson, etc.) stand out more than the ones we did draft. During my early years with the Raiders, I lived in Houston and scouted the Southwest. Two players that I recommended who performed beyond my expectations were SS Vann McElroy (Baylor) and DE Greg Townsend (TCU). The biggest disappointment had to be (former No. 1 overall) JaMarcus Russell (LSU), who I had rated as my third best player for the 2007 draft (behind Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson).  As the book relates, we told Al that JaMarcus needed a structured environment but such was not provided in Oakland.  We basically gave a young man $30 million and let him roam the East Bay.

Is life better overall for scouts now than it was 10 years ago? 20 years ago?

Kingdon: There has been a great evolution in scouting. When I was first hired, scouts would be lugging projectors around to the schools to watch their film. Sometime you would have to watch the film against the wall in the bathroom of a locker room. Going from film to tape and finally to digitizing also makes things a lot easier. Now the teams have film on every school from the prior season and receive it as the season progresses. Scouts are now able to watch a team’s film prior to showing up at the school, enabling the scout to determine where the players he is scouting line up prior to arriving at the school, saving time and allowing the scout to go right into the evaluation process.

Kebric: Worse. The (Cowboys owner) Jerry Jones mantra of “hiring 25-year-olds and paying them $25,000 a year” seems to pervade the league.  When I entered the NFL in 1968, the scouts were held in much higher esteem since the majority had been NFL players, NFL executives or NFL/college coaches. Of course, until the late 1970s, the draft was held in early February, which did not permit the coaches to be as involved as today.

Wednesday, we ask Jon and Bruce how Al Davis would look at the analytics wave in football, and how Davis evaluated his scouts and draft team. Don’t forget to check out the book on Amazon.

NFL Success: The Formula, or At Least Our Theory

07 Monday Aug 2017

Posted by in Agents, ITL, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

On Tuesday, I’ll be talking to a small group of business leaders from around Houston. The friend who asked me to speak, a wealth manager from a major firm here in the Bayou City, asked me to talk a little bit about what I do, and a little bit about the coming season, the Texans, etc.

Here’s a confession: I always get a little nervous when I’m speaking for a general crowd, i.e., mostly fans. If I’m talking to agents, scouts, financial advisors, parents of players, or anyone who’s already in the game, that’s my wheelhouse. We speak the same language, and I think I can provide them with something helpful. For people who just want to talk about the game, I’m a little less certain about things.

In thinking about what to present, I decided I’d try to discuss my theory on the keys to success in the NFL and apply it to the Texans. The beauty of this topic is that it can be applied to most any team. I’ve set this up to basically determine a team’s chances of making the playoffs, because I think winning the Super Bowl is a function of so many things (team health, how hot the team is over the last month of the season, relative strength of teams in your conference, etc.). If you can pinpoint a team’s chances of making the playoffs, to me, you’ve got a pretty good indicator of what kind of organization you have.

Anyway, in my estimation, here are the five elements that lead directly to NFL success, and their relative importance.

Quarterback (team leader, leader of offense): 25 percent – I was texting with a scout recently who was sharply critical of the Patriots’ college scouting record and methods, and in gest, I responded that their philosophy only works if you have Tom Brady as your quarterback. Actually, that’s true of almost every team. If you have an elite QB, it’s like you’re halfway home. It certainly covers for a lot of mistakes.

Rest of roster (football IQ, athleticism, fit to system): 25 percent – At the end of the day, players play. Others get fired when they don’t play well enough, but it’s the success of the players that determines everything else. If you have a ‘C’ coach and an ‘A’ roster, you can win. The reverse is not necessarily true, certainly not long-term.

Owner (commitment to winning, stadium, control/delegation): 10 percent – You may disagree with Jerry Jones’ style, or his ego, or whatever, but you can’t question his commitment to winning, the team’s stadium and practice facility, and his willingness to make tough decisions. Obviously, not all his decisions have worked out, but he’s not ben afraid to make them.

GM (head coach selection, management of draft, management of cap, head coach accountability): 25 percent – Here I’m assuming this is the traditional GM who has total control of the draft and hiring a head coach. I know this model is going away, but I think it’s the best way. In fact, I debated over making the GM 30 or 35 percent. This is why the Dave Gettleman and John Dorsey firings are, to me, incredibly big mistakes.

Head coach (selection of staff, game manager, fits system to talent, player accountability): 15 percent – There are plenty who’d say the head coach is the most important part of the team, and we’re seeing that realized in their salaries, but I think the ‘genius’ coach is mostly a function of his players.

This is my theory. Am I right? Am I wrong? Let me know in the comments or on Twitter.

 

Are NFL Scouts Becoming a Thing of the Past?

04 Friday Aug 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

We’ve been exploring a scouting-related theme in this space for the last few months, and it has to do with the value and relevance of traditional, on-the-road area scouts (also known as college scouts). More precisely, we’ve indirectly asked the question, are  scouts becoming a thing of the past?

A few developments over the last month-plus put a finer point on our question. First of all, two classic evaluation-style GMs, John Dorsey in Kansas City and Dave Gettleman in Carolina, were let go. You could argue (and I believe) they were two of the top five general managers in the game.

Shortly after that, the Packers, one of the most stable and well-respected teams in the league, shifted several of their seasoned evaluators to the pro side and replaced them with first- and second-year scouts.

As we’ve done previously this summer, we went to Angry Scouting Veteran and Angry Scout 2 for candor and opinion without compromise. Both made good points.

Angry Scouting Veteran made several good points in a lengthy take. I won’t run it out completely here (it’s pretty extensive), but his main points, in his own words, were:

  • “Some guys view moving from college to pro scouting as a way to go home every night as opposed to being on the road.”
  • “Other guys view pro scouting as a quicker way to move up the ladder towards GM because you’re in the office, around people at the top level, and learning/working in other elements that college guys aren’t around or don’t have time for.”
  • “John Wojciechowski is a great guy, very highly respected in the scouting community, and has deserved some kind of opportunity for advancement for quite some time now. He has a young family and between he and the Packers brass, they both most likely agreed that this was the best move for his career and his family.”
  • “I’ve also heard that (Packers GM) Ted Thompson detests change, so moving up younger guys who were already in the program to road scout roles was another logical move for him.”

He also went on to decry the idea of eliminating road scouts, and his hopes that this isn’t a trend. Obviously, I heartily agree with both sentiments.

Angry Scout 2 was less certain about the Packers’ motivations, but was willing to believe the team wanted to reward some young people Thompson sees as rising stars. On the other hand, he sees some deference to trends, as well.

  • “Remember there are people in the NFL who want a “yes” man and to feel their scouts will just go with what they think. Maybe Green Bay did some favors or perhaps they know these people are good scouts. . . You never want a staff entirely of people over 50 (and) it’s good to have a mix.”
  • “If (the Packers) do what they use to, then the new scouts are good. I know their NFS scout has always seemed to be pretty good the last 10 years.”
  • “People are gravitating to analytics. They see how it’s a crapshoot no matter how good the scout is, and they want older scouts out because younger people are more likely to accept analytics.”
  • “One theory I have is that people see (New England). They are killing it on pro side but very average on the draft. They want experience in pro.”

 

A Conversation with Angry Scouting Veteran (Pt. 5)

10 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Today, we get a little more specific about the scouting industry by digging into the services that set the table for each draft the summer beforehand. We asked Angry Scouting Veteran (@AngryScout) his take on National Football Scouting and BLESTO, two services that are an integral (if mostly unknown) part of the business.

BLESTO and National are accepted parts of the scouting landscape. What are the strengths and weaknesses of using a scouting service? Do teams rely on them too much? Does the services’ reliance on mostly young scouts affect the validity of their work?

“BLESTO and National are not only accepted, but to me a VITAL part of the scouting process. To me, if a team isn’t using one, then they’re 1) cheap, 2) don’t understand the process, and/or 3) should be paying their scouts double, because they are doing two jobs. Using a scouting service is worth it, if for nothing else than to get a baseline on character and medical information. If a team relies on their combine info too much, it’s their own fault. If there are people in leadership roles that know what they are doing, then they realize that using a combine provides the baseline/initial look in the process, and that the information is useful, but should only be valued as one ingredient in the recipe. National has a lot more teams, so they are able to provide more in-depth coverage, given that their scouts have much smaller areas than their BLESTO counterparts. BLESTO is more of a family business, National is more corporate, but at the end of the day it’s like Nike or Adidas. They’re doing the same thing. It’s all a matter of what environment you prefer or what you are using the service for the most.

“A combine scout is young and entry-level; that’s fine, again, as long as the people running the teams who are in the services understand the purpose of being in a combine. A combine scout’s jobs, in order, are to surface prospects, provide as much information about those prospects as possible, and to grow as talent evaluators. If you are a GM and you’re concerned about what the combine scout’s grades are — other than those being the starting point for how many exposures you need at each school — then you don’t have a clue what you are doing, and you shouldn’t be a GM.

“Our scouting process really begins in May at a combine spring meeting. That’s where each combine scout presents all of the work that he’s done in the spring while the rest of us are getting ready for the draft. It’s unreasonable to ask area scouts to do this advance work, and it’s also disrespectful to remove them from the draft process to do so. The draft is a scout’s game day, and not allowing us to finish that entire process and be involved in the “big game” is like asking an Olympic athlete to train all year long but then not letting them in the stadium for the opening ceremonies or permitting them to compete. If you want to be stubborn (and cheap) and not use a combine, fine, then pay your scouts for two jobs, because that’s what they are doing.”

A Conversation with Angry Scouting Veteran (Pt. 4)

07 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Very often, scouts on the road are very different from the men they report to. For our fourth question, we asked Angry Scouting Veteran (@angryscout) if that’s something that rankles the people below the GM. It comes as no surprise that he continued to bring the heat on this and other topics related to the GM role.

Let’s say you could build the perfect GM candidate. What qualifications would he have? Can a legitimate GM candidate come from the cap side?

“I’ll work in reverse here. A successful GM can only come from the cap or business side if 1) he is very self-aware and willing to admit that he is a business guy, not a football guy; and 2) he hires very good football people, lets them do their jobs, and relies on what they say to make his decisions. Hell, 95% of the owners in the NFL don’t know jack squat about football (and that might be a generous estimate), and most of them fail because their giant egos won’t allow them to let their football people do their jobs. People can throw the dumb jock stereotypes out there all they want, but not everybody knows football, and just because you watch it, are around it, or even own a team, it doesn’t qualify you to make FOOTBLL decisions.

“As far as building a perfect GM candidate, my guy has to be a former road scout. If he isn’t, your scouting department and your team basically don’t have much of a chance. You build successful teams through the draft, and if you don’t have a guy who has been in the grass-roots role of this process, I’m sorry, but to me it’s both insulting and hopeless to think that guy can lead a team to victory. Beyond that, how about somebody who actually has LEADERSHIP skills and qualities? It is beyond bizarre to me how many people in the NFL (or in life outside the league for that matter) are in positions of leadership who have ZERO leadership skills and abilities. To be a leader, you have to realize that your primary role is to serve those under your leadership and always do what is right for all of them and the organization’s success as whole. It doesn’t mean that you have to be the smartest guy in the room at all times, and that everyone should kiss your (butt) or bow down to you; that’s not remotely what leadership is, but it’s how a lot of people in the NFL try and personify it. As far as other elements of this candidate: skilled with the media is a benefit for sure, because God knows that dealing with them can be a complete nightmare (and that many owners somehow believe that if it’s in the media, it must be true!). I’d like a guy who has been a coach, too, or at least around coaching enough to understand it. To me, you leave the business savvy up to business guys in the organization. Give me a guy who has worked his way up from a road scout position, has great leadership ability, inspires (and gives) loyalty, and is a legit FOOTBALL GUY who hires good people and lets them do the jobs he hired them to do, and everything else falls into place.

“That’s another thing the scouting community as a whole needs to have more of a voice and presence in, (and that’s with) the candidates that become GMs. Right now, you have owners who know nothing about scouting or the guys who work in it, who then turn to consultants, ex-personnel guys who usually pimp their former interns, young scouts, or anyone who has kissed their (butt). There are many highly qualified and deserving men who half the football world isn’t even made aware of because they aren’t media darlings, members of the league hype machine’s chosen ones, or kissing someone’s (butt) every day. Right now, there are area scouts who would make 10 times better GMs than quite a few guys with that fancy name plate on their desk. Believe it.”