Public reactions to Jed York.

See the big picture and follow the money.

The most important thing to the Yorks is the June vote on a new stadium in Santa Clara. If that measure passes, the financial value of the franchise will jump overnight, maybe by $100M or more. That provides more collateral for the club as a borrower in raising funds for their part of the stadium financing. NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING, will be allowed to get in the way of obtaining a favorable vote on that stadium measure.

York is being criticized for a short-term approach to front office re-staffing (whether he will hire a GM or not). Should that be a surprise given the massive ownership interest on the June 2010 vote? If the measure passes, ownership can project a higher revenue stream and staff their organization and plan expenses on that basis. For example, you might then see a big ticket HOFO/GM hired.

Fans might want to think about what will happen if that measure does NOT pass. Perhaps an inclination to minimize costs, especially with a lock-out on the horizon.

Also consider York's silence on the specific reasons for McCloughan's departure within the framework of the pending stadium vote. I think the tip-off is the mixed use of the terms "personel" and "personal". Personel does not = personal. How would a messy organization issue, say, for example, a sexual harsassment suit against the club by a Santa Clara resident, affect the voting citizens of Santa Clara? I repeat that NOTHING will be allowed to get in the way of a positive vote on the stadium measure. Any potential negatives will be swept under the rug or buried until after that June vote.

It seems clear to me that Jed York's lack of specificity on the reasons for McCloughan's "firing", are more related to self-preservation for the ownership's stadium interests, than they are related to some level of personal respect for McCloughan. Could it be that McCloughan's "personal" actions, after a prior warning ("we saw this coming and were prepared"), have created a highly volatile "personel" problem for the Niners, involving another employee or contractor? York would have to quickly distance the club from McCloughan, creating some PR space, if not legal protection.

So, expect total and absolute stone-walling from the Niners, until after that June vote. Only, if some public legal filing against the Niners (for example, a sexual harassment suit) is filed by a third party, will anything surface before that vote. And there are ways (mega $ pay-off) to keep such actions from happening during this critical time.

Any such "personel" issue would be a hot potato for all legitimate sports journalists, who are more comfortable (aloing with their editors) in writing about QB controversies than HR rules and regulations. So, don't expect public speculation by beat writers and the sporting press, without someone in the know, who is willing to quote on the record, or they could face lawsuits of their own from the Niners.

"Personel" does not = "Personal". Read between the lines and it will be easier to understand what Jed York is saying (and not saying), and why.

[ Edited by jimbagg on Mar 23, 2010 at 11:36:04 ]

*****************READ THIS***********READ THIS*********************

Yorks constant lockbox on the situation and repetitive answers did get frustrating, but honestly who can blame him? He said all that he could say without throwing a former employee under the bus. It's annoying to not know the truth but in terms of business, I wouldn't have really done anything differently.


I don't see why people are SO worried about not having McC here for the draft. As others have mentioned we have a whole scouting staff, it's not just McCloughan who knows about the upcoming draft class. Furthermore, during his time here, McCloughan all too frequently crapped the bed on draft picks. I know about Gore, Davis, Crabtree and Willis. Yet, what about ALL those other picks? Balmer?

The fact that Gore was more of a lucky pick than anything else?

The fact that Davis would have possibly been a big bust if it wasn't for Singletary?

The fact that everyone on this board would have picked Crabtree once he slid anyways?
An
The guy was not a good talent evaluator. He was marginal AT best. The only thing I can truly give him credit for is the Willis pick and it's not even because he saw the talent (because a lot of us, myself included, did) it's just because he got the whole front office to trust him on that one.

Enough ranting.... the bottomline is that McCloughan was a subpar GM. Tell me about how there was no talent here when he arrived in '05 and I'll tell you that there's still not enough on this team 5 years later, despite multiple FA moves and high draft picks.

The Niners draft board is about 95 percent completed, so in no way, shape or form will his departure affect this draft. There is a HUGE question mark in terms of what we'll do afterwards and, in typical York fashion, I'm not so sure this organization has a backup plan (see cutting Allen Rossum).

I realize we should have done this earlier and made a play for Allen or Holmgren but the timing wasn't there due to these "personal" "personnel" issues. I don't think we're going to be any worse off without McCloughan. That would be an extremely difficult thing to accomplish.

As I read the many opinions regarding the competence of the Yorks, I am reminded that everyone has an opinion. But not all opinions are of equal value. Good opinions come from having all of the facts.

My opinion might be wrong because of not having all the facts, but ten years of watching the Yorks' decisions, I am convinced this team will continue to lurch from one self-inflicted wound to another. Out of 32 NFL teams, I see no chance of the team becoming one of the top 8. I regard SanDiego's opinion on this subject as correct.

Our front office is overmatched and unprepared but because of 1. the handful of talent we have and 2. the sheer lack of competition, I still have no cause to worry (about this upcoming season). We'll be fine for right now, it's the future that remains very uncertain, but then again, it always does.

Why I am happy:

"The one thing that I will promise you is that I will not be general manager and Paraag (Marathe) will not be general manager." York said that Marathe was not involved in McCloughan's exit. "None," he said of Marathe's involvement.

I don't need a Cap specialist who shouldn't be making replay decisions in the booth to be heading up our drafts.

Originally posted by jimbagg:
See the big picture and follow the money.

The most important thing to the Yorks is the June vote on a new stadium in Santa Clara. If that measure passes, the financial value of the franchise will jump overnight, maybe by $100M or more. That provides more collateral for the club as a borrower in raising funds for their part of the stadium financing. NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING, will be allowed to get in the way of obtaining a favorable vote on that stadium measure.

York is being criticized for a short-term approach to front office re-staffing (whether he will hire a GM or not). Should that be a surprise given the massive ownership interest on the June 2010 vote? If the measure passes, ownership can project a higher revenue stream and staff their organization and plan expenses on that basis. For example, you might then see a big ticket HOFO/GM hired.

Fans might want to think about what will happen if that measure does NOT pass. Perhaps an inclination to minimize costs, especially with a lock-out on the horizon.

Also consider York's silence on the specific reasons for McCloughan's departure within the framework of the pending stadium vote. I think the tip-off is the mixed use of the terms "personel" and "personal". Personel does not = personal. How would a messy organization issue, say, for example, a sexual harsassment suit against the club by a Santa Clara resident, affect the voting citizens of Santa Clara? I repeat that NOTHING will be allowed to get in the way of a positive vote on the stadium measure. Any potential negatives will be swept under the rug or buried until after that June vote.

It seems clear to me that Jed York's lack of specificity on the reasons for McCloughan's "firing", are more related to self-preservation for the ownership's stadium interests, than they are related to some level of personal respect for McCloughan. Could it be that McCloughan's "personal" actions, after a prior warning ("we saw this coming and were prepared"), have created a highly volatile "personel" problem for the Niners, involving another employee or contractor? York would have to quickly distance the club from McCloughan, creating some PR space, if not legal protection.

So, expect total and absolute stone-walling from the Niners, until after that June vote. Only, if some public legal filing against the Niners (for example, a sexual harassment suit) is filed by a third party, will anything surface before that vote. And there are ways (mega $ pay-off) to keep such actions from happening during this critical time.

Any such "personel" issue would be a hot potato for all legitimate sports journalists, who are more comfortable (aloing with their editors) in writing about QB controversies than HR rules and regulations. So, don't expect public speculation by beat writers and the sporting press, without someone in the know, who is willing to quote on the record, or they could face lawsuits of their own from the Niners.

"Personel" does not = "Personal". Read between the lines and it will be easier to understand what Jed York is saying (and not saying), and why.

Interesting take.

Do us all a favor and cheer for the Chargers. Even when the Niners get back to being successful, you will always find something to b***h about since all you do is live in the past.

Was Eddie D and idiot for wanting to fire Bill Walsh on a few occasions? I like the fact that we have a guy who is quick to follow his gut.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
http://blog.pressdemocrat.com/49ers/2010/03/york-announces-mccloughans-departure-as-49ers-gm.html

How the public and fans view the comments of Jed York.

1) "Does anyone else find this press conference (to say nothing of the whole process) bizarre? How do you go from giving the keys to the kingdom to McCloughan to having it be in both parties' "best interest" to part just a few weeks before the draft? This organization is Dysfunctional (with a capital D)."

2) "If Jed York had any integrity he would get out of the football business. Jed is an absolute joke and his team is a laughingstock. If there was any hint that mccloughlin wasnt up to the job a couple months ago, the niners should have jumped on bruce allen or holmgren.

As the warrior situation shows, fans and the lack of money can force ownership moves. It is time for a real talk about boycotting this sorry organization, and its an especially good time when they decide to RAISE ticket prices by 10% after a non-playoff year.

Boycott this team, stop spending any more money on this inept family."

3) "I wonder if Larry Ellison's possible purchase of the Warriors means he won't also be in the market for the 49ers one day.

After a decade of York ownership, here we are again with what has become business as usual: Ongoing integrity problems, instability, and a putrid team on the field."

Dude strap on a tampon and shut up. Seriously you are freaking out, what are we supposed to boycott? I want to watch and support them not cry and b***h I mean christ we're not Raider fans...

Originally posted by jimbagg:
See the big picture and follow the money.

The most important thing to the Yorks is the June vote on a new stadium in Santa Clara. If that measure passes, the financial value of the franchise will jump overnight, maybe by $100M or more. That provides more collateral for the club as a borrower in raising funds for their part of the stadium financing. NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING, will be allowed to get in the way of obtaining a favorable vote on that stadium measure.

York is being criticized for a short-term approach to front office re-staffing (whether he will hire a GM or not). Should that be a surprise given the massive ownership interest on the June 2010 vote? If the measure passes, ownership can project a higher revenue stream and staff their organization and plan expenses on that basis. For example, you might then see a big ticket HOFO/GM hired.

Fans might want to think about what will happen if that measure does NOT pass. Perhaps an inclination to minimize costs, especially with a lock-out on the horizon.

Also consider York's silence on the specific reasons for McCloughan's departure within the framework of the pending stadium vote. I think the tip-off is the mixed use of the terms "personel" and "personal". Personel does not = personal. How would a messy organization issue, say, for example, a sexual harsassment suit against the club by a Santa Clara resident, affect the voting citizens of Santa Clara? I repeat that NOTHING will be allowed to get in the way of a positive vote on the stadium measure. Any potential negatives will be swept under the rug or buried until after that June vote.

It seems clear to me that Jed York's lack of specificity on the reasons for McCloughan's "firing", are more related to self-preservation for the ownership's stadium interests, than they are related to some level of personal respect for McCloughan. Could it be that McCloughan's "personal" actions, after a prior warning ("we saw this coming and were prepared"), have created a highly volatile "personel" problem for the Niners, involving another employee or contractor? York would have to quickly distance the club from McCloughan, creating some PR space, if not legal protection.

So, expect total and absolute stone-walling from the Niners, until after that June vote. Only, if some public legal filing against the Niners (for example, a sexual harassment suit) is filed by a third party, will anything surface before that vote. And there are ways (mega $ pay-off) to keep such actions from happening during this critical time.

Any such "personel" issue would be a hot potato for all legitimate sports journalists, who are more comfortable (aloing with their editors) in writing about QB controversies than HR rules and regulations. So, don't expect public speculation by beat writers and the sporting press, without someone in the know, who is willing to quote on the record, or they could face lawsuits of their own from the Niners.

"Personel" does not = "Personal". Read between the lines and it will be easier to understand what Jed York is saying (and not saying), and why.

Great post.

Most likely scenario, especially if one can understand logic.

Originally posted by 49erWill:
Am I the only one that doesnt really care about that situation? something happened that Scot doesnt want to talk about. So I dont really care what it was.

gotta move on

i don't care either. he's gone, what does it matter why.

Originally posted by darkknight49:

Originally posted by 49erWill:
Am I the only one that doesnt really care about that situation? something happened that Scot doesnt want to talk about. So I dont really care what it was.

gotta move on

i don't care either. he's gone, what does it matter why.

It should be end of discussion, but because we r unsure what this will all mean as time goes by.....

I think it shows what he thinks of the general intelligence of the fan base.

I mean you have to have a pretty low regard of your audience to go ahead and coin the organizations parting of ways with a GM as a "private personnel matter"

Originally posted by danimal:
I think it shows what he thinks of the general intelligence of the fan base.

I mean you have to have a pretty low regard of your audience to go ahead and coin the organizations parting of ways with a GM as a "private personnel matter"

Maybe he's been reading WZ posts?

Originally posted by danimal:
I think it shows what he thinks of the general intelligence of the fan base.

I mean you have to have a pretty low regard of your audience to go ahead and coin the organizations parting of ways with a GM as a "private personnel matter"