Should a Head Coach have the final say on personnel and the 9ers may have the wrong model?

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
The coaches I would trust to make that final call are very few and far between. I remember when Spurrier came to the NFL and basically just started drafting and signing all of his players from college. You need someone who is detached from everything to sort of be the voice of reason and the adult in the room.

Out of the guys the 49ers are contemplating hiring, who would you entrust with personnel powers.....Holmgren...who was awful at it, Shanahan who blew up the Redskins franchise with his poor decisions, McDaniels who traded up for Tebow, Gase who has been an OC for 2 seasons and has limited personnel experience......etc.





All I know is that historically successful franchises such as Green Bay and Pittsburgh have continued to operate with the same model and it has never been an issue for them.

OK, let me ask you this. Before Pete Carroll got his gig at Seattle, did you think he would work out great being in charge of personnel as well ?

If you think about it, any organization could hire the wrong coach and the wrong GM cos frankly let's face it is not easy to get it right. The difference of having the HC being in charge of personnel as well is at the very least you can do away with any potential conflict, i.e. you are essentially streamlining the personnel decision-making process.

No. Too much responsiblity. He needs to focus on coaching.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
As always...depends on the man. Some HCs can make tough decisions and do a great job selecting personnel but they have to have a really good personnel department to outline the options. Ideally, the HC and GM agree on a basic formula and the GM gives the coach his way on most situations.

Fans always assume a coach or GM wanted a particular player but how often do we really know who wanted what? CK--Harbaugh? Maybe, or he might have wanted Dalton and Baalke missed and took CK to appease the coach. We can assume Baalke wanted Jenkins because he made a big deal out of it...but who had input into rating Jenkins above other WRs? Hill, Jeffrey, Randle...Fleener? I think Fleener is/was a tweener who would have helped the 9ers greatly.

But without knowing which of the ten or more guys in the war room were pounding the table for which players...

One mystery that has never been solved is that why didn't Jim Harbaugh advocate harder for some of his Stanford guys. And I don't mean Konrad Reuland types. I mean guys you know could make the roster, like Zach Ertz, Coby Fleener, etc. We all know why (or supposedly know) why we missed on Doug Baldwin. For that alone AND the lack of development at wide receiver, that coach should've been fired.

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:
No. Too much responsiblity. He needs to focus on coaching.

Pete Carroll seems to be doing alright ?

Originally posted by Rascal:
OK, let me ask you this. Before Pete Carroll got his gig at Seattle, did you think he would work out great being in charge of personnel as well ?

If you think about it, any organization could hire the wrong coach and the wrong GM cos frankly let's face it is not easy to get it right. The difference of having the HC being in charge of personnel as well is at the very least you can do away with any potential conflict, i.e. you are essentially streamlining the personnel decision-making process.

Nope, but John Schneider had a great reputation and was considered a bright personnel guy, so adding him into the mix sure didn't hurt I'm sure. I just think its too much power for any one person to wield appropriately and when guys screw up without any checks or balances, they can set a franchise back by 4 or 5 years. With a GM and a coach you're supposed to have some tension, there is supposed to be give and take, compromise, there's always supposed to be someone to call out the other on their BS.


But generally the GM will try to acquiesce to what the coach wants. Like how Harbaugh wanted Kaepernick, Baalke wasn't going to force him to take Dalton or some other QB, he got him the guy that he wanted. I believe that this generally happens but there are times when the GM has to flat out tell the coach no, some coaches can deal with that, some can't but I just think its a better system, a better way to run a team.

Originally posted by Rascal:
Pete Carroll seems to be doing alright ?

Carroll, just like Belichick is more the exception and not the rule. Both guys are extremely experienced that have been around for a long time, have had multiple stints as NFL coaches, as well as success in college. They are both in the minority when it comes to coaches succeeding with all the power.


You can't say that the 49ers have the wrong approach when most of the recent Superbowl winners used the exact same approach in dividing up power.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Nope, but John Schneider had a great reputation and was considered a bright personnel guy, so adding him into the mix sure didn't hurt I'm sure. I just think its too much power for any one person to wield appropriately and when guys screw up without any checks or balances, they can set a franchise back by 4 or 5 years. With a GM and a coach you're supposed to have some tension, there is supposed to be give and take, compromise, there's always supposed to be someone to call out the other on their BS.


But generally the GM will try to acquiesce to what the coach wants. Like how Harbaugh wanted Kaepernick, Baalke wasn't going to force him to take Dalton or some other QB, he got him the guy that he wanted. I believe that this generally happens but there are times when the GM has to flat out tell the coach no, some coaches can deal with that, some can't but I just think its a better system, a better way to run a team.

I am just trying to go by common sense here. If you think about it, we, only as fans could argue till the cows come home on a given draft choice or pick, imagine what if you were the head coach of an NFL team and you had to abide by what the GM picks for you ?! Sure Baalke might have given Harbaugh Kap, but that is the QB given Harbaugh was considered as the QB Whisperer since he actually played the position both in college and the NFL. But, at the end of the day that was only 1 pick. Imagine if Harbaugh wanted Alshon Jeffery and Baalke went and got AJ Jenkins ? If you were Harbaugh, would you not have exploded ? And what if the majority of Harbaugh's own picks contradicted Baalke's choices ?

Originally posted by Rascal:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Nope, but John Schneider had a great reputation and was considered a bright personnel guy, so adding him into the mix sure didn't hurt I'm sure. I just think its too much power for any one person to wield appropriately and when guys screw up without any checks or balances, they can set a franchise back by 4 or 5 years. With a GM and a coach you're supposed to have some tension, there is supposed to be give and take, compromise, there's always supposed to be someone to call out the other on their BS.


But generally the GM will try to acquiesce to what the coach wants. Like how Harbaugh wanted Kaepernick, Baalke wasn't going to force him to take Dalton or some other QB, he got him the guy that he wanted. I believe that this generally happens but there are times when the GM has to flat out tell the coach no, some coaches can deal with that, some can't but I just think its a better system, a better way to run a team.

I am just trying to go by common sense here. If you think about it, we, only as fans could argue till the cows come home on a given draft choice or pick, imagine what if you were the head coach of an NFL team and you had to abide by what the GM picks for you ?! Sure Baalke might have given Harbaugh Kap, but that is the QB given Harbaugh was considered as the QB Whisperer since he actually played the position both in college and the NFL. But, at the end of the day that was only 1 pick. Imagine if Harbaugh wanted Alshon Jeffery and Baalke went and got AJ Jenkins ? If you were Harbaugh, would you not have exploded ? And what if the majority of Harbaugh's own picks contradicted Baalke's choices ?

That's a lot of what ifs. Maybe that's why Harbaugh won't play the talented young guys lol (Hyde, Ellington, Patton). They are all "Baalke guys."

I don't think they could've been that far apart on personnel decisions. Not that they agreed on every pick, but I don't believe draft picks was at the root of this problem.

It will be ballke's ass on the line from now on. Next coach that gets canned gets to walk out with Ballke.

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
One mystery that has never been solved is that why didn't Jim Harbaugh advocate harder for some of his Stanford guys. And I don't mean Konrad Reuland types. I mean guys you know could make the roster, like Zach Ertz, Coby Fleener, etc. We all know why (or supposedly know) why we missed on Doug Baldwin. For that alone AND the lack of development at wide receiver, that coach should've been fired.

Not sure whether this was JH's problem or TB saying..."Don't romanticize your old players." I really wanted Fleener or Ertz but only hindsight tells me taking Jenkins and James was a terrible substitute! LOL! Throwing away your first and second round choices...

Originally posted by Youngone:
It will be ballke's ass on the line from now on. Next coach that gets canned gets to walk out with Ballke.

I agree. I don't think Baalke can survive many more AJ Jenkins, LMJ and Vance McDonald type incidents.

No, but the GM and coach must be on the same page and be able to work together.

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:

Originally posted by Rascal:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Nope, but John Schneider had a great reputation and was considered a bright personnel guy, so adding him into the mix sure didn't hurt I'm sure. I just think its too much power for any one person to wield appropriately and when guys screw up without any checks or balances, they can set a franchise back by 4 or 5 years. With a GM and a coach you're supposed to have some tension, there is supposed to be give and take, compromise, there's always supposed to be someone to call out the other on their BS.


But generally the GM will try to acquiesce to what the coach wants. Like how Harbaugh wanted Kaepernick, Baalke wasn't going to force him to take Dalton or some other QB, he got him the guy that he wanted. I believe that this generally happens but there are times when the GM has to flat out tell the coach no, some coaches can deal with that, some can't but I just think its a better system, a better way to run a team.

I am just trying to go by common sense here. If you think about it, we, only as fans could argue till the cows come home on a given draft choice or pick, imagine what if you were the head coach of an NFL team and you had to abide by what the GM picks for you ?! Sure Baalke might have given Harbaugh Kap, but that is the QB given Harbaugh was considered as the QB Whisperer since he actually played the position both in college and the NFL. But, at the end of the day that was only 1 pick. Imagine if Harbaugh wanted Alshon Jeffery and Baalke went and got AJ Jenkins ? If you were Harbaugh, would you not have exploded ? And what if the majority of Harbaugh's own picks contradicted Baalke's choices ?

That's a lot of what ifs. Maybe that's why Harbaugh won't play the talented young guys lol (Hyde, Ellington, Patton). They are all "Baalke guys."

I don't think they could've been that far apart on personnel decisions. Not that they agreed on every pick, but I don't believe draft picks was at the root of this problem.

But, I am not just talking about the Harbaugh/Baalke incident, I am just using it as an example. I am talking about in general what model should be more effective going forward. Don't forget the next HC coming in will have to face the same arrangement as Harbaugh did.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Hell no. It may work for some teams but its blown up for a lot of others. Thinking Josh McDaniels trading up for Tim Tebow. Or Shanahan trading the farm for RG 3 and Out. There's not many head coaches that have the ability to handle the GM role as well and they are better off focusing on becoming better coaches and leaving the personnel side to those who specialize in that.




Out of the recent Superbowl winners, only New Orleans and Seattle had all the power vested in the head coach and Seattle might spend more on their FO than any other team in the NFL. Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Baltimore and the Giants all followed the traditional model of having split power between the coach and the GM.

This

Originally posted by Rascal:
I am just trying to go by common sense here. If you think about it, we, only as fans could argue till the cows come home on a given draft choice or pick, imagine what if you were the head coach of an NFL team and you had to abide by what the GM picks for you ?! Sure Baalke might have given Harbaugh Kap, but that is the QB given Harbaugh was considered as the QB Whisperer since he actually played the position both in college and the NFL. But, at the end of the day that was only 1 pick. Imagine if Harbaugh wanted Alshon Jeffery and Baalke went and got AJ Jenkins ? If you were Harbaugh, would you not have exploded ? And what if the majority of Harbaugh's own picks contradicted Baalke's choices ?

Imagine if Harbaugh wanted AJ Jenkins because he was a more talented dead ringer for a receiver Harbaugh had at Stanford named Chris Owusu and Baalke acquiesced to keep him happy.