Grigson Lands a Job in Seattle

[DaveA1102]

How does this guy keep getting work?

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000937015/article/former-colts-gm-ryan-grigson-lands-with-seahawks

[pgt_rob]

38 minutes ago, DaveA1102 said:

How does this guy keep getting work?

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000937015/article/former-colts-gm-ryan-grigson-lands-with-seahawks

 

Hmm, wonder what he's going to be in charge of in Seattle's front office? Running the vacuum, emptying the trash bins, retrieving everyone's papers from the printer?

[csmopar]

55 minutes ago, DaveA1102 said:

How does this guy keep getting work?

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000937015/article/former-colts-gm-ryan-grigson-lands-with-seahawks

same way corrupt and inept politicians get re-elected, name recognition. 

[Buck Showalter]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

same way corrupt and inept politicians get re-elected, name recognition. 

Lol... Maybe something like that. While it may be waaaay misleading, Grigson does have a GM of the year nod on his resume...

It felt really weird typing that out...

 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, DaveA1102 said:

How does this guy keep getting work?

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000937015/article/former-colts-gm-ryan-grigson-lands-with-seahawks

 

Just because you're bad in one job doesn't automatically mean you're bad in all jobs.

 

I do find it interesting that the agent DOESN'T say what the job actually is.  

 

Perhaps that will be revealed later?

 

[DaveA1102]

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Just because you're bad in one job doesn't automatically mean you're bad in all jobs.

 

I do find it interesting that the agent DOESN'T say what the job actually is.  

 

Perhaps that will be revealed later?

 

 

True, but it seems like a toxic hire. Brings bad press when his name is associated with your organisation, whether deserved or not.

 

We will see what details emerge.

[Valpo2004]

Have any of these guys when let go as GM or head coach ever considered taking all the money they made and retiring?  Go on a cross country trip or something.   I don't know why they don't do that. 

 

As far as Grigs.  There is no reason to believe that he would be bad at a subordinate job in the NFL.  They arn't hiring him to be their GM.

[Four2itus]

When a relationship ends for me, I don't care what the other half does or doesn't do. Not in my life anymore. 

[Coffeedrinker]

I know it's fun and easy to bash Grigson but before he became a GM he was a very good scout and director of scouting, he just was not ready for the GM role.

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

Is it me or does the 2,218 miles from Lucas Oil Stadium to Centurylink Field still not seem far enough away for Ryan Grigson to be? Haha. 

 

[HarryTheCat]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Just because you're bad in one job doesn't automatically mean you're bad in all jobs.

 

I do find it interesting that the agent DOESN'T say what the job actually is.  

 

Perhaps that will be revealed later?

 

Rumor has it that he was named Assistant Executive Director of Gatorade Cooler Management and Towel Laundry. Let's hope he doesn't get the two mixed up. 

 

[MTC]

The power of networking and having connections. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

Consider, he is no longer a threat to take anyone's GM job...

[shakedownstreet]

The water in the toilet continues to swirl clockwise in Seattle

[aaron11]

21 hours ago, DaveA1102 said:

 

True, but it seems like a toxic hire. Brings bad press when his name is associated with your organisation, whether deserved or not.

 

 

dont think that will be an issue out in seattle.  grigson is really disliked in indy and new england, but seahawk fans dont care about us and they hate the patriots as much as anybody 

 

they probably think deflategate was funny out there 

[shakedownstreet]

7 hours ago, shakedownstreet said:

The water in the toilet continues to swirl clockwise in Seattle

 

[Maniac]

On 6/14/2018 at 12:52 AM, pgt_rob said:

 

Hmm, wonder what he's going to be in charge of in Seattle's front office? Running the vacuum, emptying the trash bins, retrieving everyone's papers from the printer?

 

Sounds a bit tough for him.

[colts8718]

On 6/13/2018 at 2:49 PM, Coffeedrinker said:

I know it's fun and easy to bash Grigson but before he became a GM he was a very good scout and director of scouting, he just was not ready for the GM role.

He did a great scouting job for the Colts look at all the great players he left behind

[Coffeedrinker]

3 minutes ago, colts8718 said:

He did a great scouting job for the Colts look at all the great players he left behind

He wasn't a scout for the Colts.

[ReMeDy]

The fact Indy had to bring in a separate person to coach Grigson and Pagano to get along should have spoke volumes Grigson was an awful GM. If I were Grigson, I would have been embarrassed when that story got out.

 

But then you add on the bad draft decisions and what are you left with exactly? I remember our forum's draft day discussions and straight up the fans had better mock drafts than Grigson. Who exactly asked for a WR in the 1st round, or a German speaking DE? We needed QB protection.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

He wasn't a scout for the Colts.

 

First....   the poster was being sarcastic.

 

Second....    the GM is always a scout in some way....

 

[Coffeedrinker]

9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

First....   the poster was being sarcastic.

 

Second....    the GM is always a scout in some way....

 

First, so?

Second,,, every member of the staff that is involved in finding/teaching players is a scout in some way.  One of the differences in being a scout and being a GM is the plan.  As a scout you get word from the GM:

- Look for these attributes

- This is what constitutes good/bad attributes

- This is the weight we put on attributes

- These are what the coaches are looking for.

- etc.

 

The GM has to develop those items to hand to the scout.

 

Grigson would not have risen through the ranks if he was not good at the former.  His stint in Indy showed he has a lot to learn for the latter.

[NewColtsFan]

On 6/15/2018 at 4:35 AM, Coffeedrinker said:

First, so?

Second,,, every member of the staff that is involved in finding/teaching players is a scout in some way.  One of the differences in being a scout and being a GM is the plan.  As a scout you get word from the GM:

- Look for these attributes

- This is what constitutes good/bad attributes

- This is the weight we put on attributes

- These are what the coaches are looking for.

- etc.

 

The GM has to develop those items to hand to the scout.

 

Grigson would not have risen through the ranks if he was not good at the former.  His stint in Indy showed he has a lot to learn for the latter.

 

Ballard attends the Senior Bowl.

 

Ballard attends the Combine.

 

Ballard attends select Pro Days.

 

So did Grigson.   So do all GMs.

 

They may not have the title of scout,  but they ALL scout to one degree or another.    They watch endless amounts of tape.   They make the final decision.

 

Scouting is a part of the GMs job.   Saying Grigson did not scout for the Colts is incorrect.

[Coffeedrinker]

8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Ballard attends the Senior Bowl.

 

Ballard attends the Combine.

 

Ballard attends select Pro Days.

 

So did Grigson.   So do all GMs.

 

They may not have the title of scout,  but the ALL scout to one degree or another.    They watch endless amounts of tape.   They make the final decision.

 

Scouting is a part of the GMs job.   Saying Grigson did not scout for the Colts is incorrect.

Oh my word.  No, it's not incorrect.  It's the difference between a manager and a line worker, a manager in baseball and a position coach, a department head at a college and a professor.

 

Grigson proved he was good at finding players that met the GMs and coaches criteria.  Grigson was not good at developing the criteria.

[NewColtsFan]

22 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Oh my word.  No, it's not incorrect.  It's the difference between a manager and a line worker, a manager in baseball and a position coach, a department head at a college and a professor.

 

Grigson proved he was good at finding players that met the GMs and coaches criteria.  Grigson was not good at developing the criteria.

You are muddying the argument.

 

Whether someone is good at the job or not is completely irrelevant.

 

The GM may also be the manager of all the scouts but he ALSO scouts.   Scouting is part of the job as I demonstrated in my previous post.

 

All the other arguments are beside the point.   The point is all GMs also scout.

 

[shakedownstreet]

I once had a dog named Scout

[ColtsBlueFL]

 

From my understanding scouts do almost all of the scouting most of the year.  Then the GM and coaches mainly get involved after the season ends, and their main focus is watching tape and interviewing/working out the top level draft candidates (Rounds 1 -3 types). They trust in the reports of the scouting staff for giving them all of the information needed to make decisions on every guy, but mostly those late round guys.  If the GM and coaches could do it in the off season, there would be little need for teams to employ college regional scouts

[colts8718]

22 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

He wasn't a scout for the Colts.

But he still had a hand in all his great picks

[NannyMcafee]

On 6/13/2018 at 10:52 AM, pgt_rob said:

 

Hmm, wonder what he's going to be in charge of in Seattle's front office? Running the vacuum, emptying the trash bins, retrieving everyone's papers from the printer?

Coffee

[Coffeedrinker]

19 hours ago, colts8718 said:

But he still had a hand in all his great picks

Of course he did.  That is my point with his job in Seattle and his jobs before becoming GM.  If someone tells him what to look for, he is good at finding it.  His time as GM showed he is not good at determining what to look for.

[Coffeedrinker]

22 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You are muddying the argument.

 

Whether someone is good at the job or not is completely irrelevant.

 

The GM may also be the manager of all the scouts but he ALSO scouts.   Scouting is part of the job as I demonstrated in my previous post.

 

All the other arguments are beside the point.   The point is all GMs also scout.

 

I see, so all other arguments that disagree with your view point are beside the point.

 

Got it.  Thanks for the correction. :

[Coffeedrinker]

20 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

From my understanding scouts do almost all of the scouting most of the year.  Then the GM and coaches mainly get involved after the season ends, and their main focus is watching tape and interviewing/working out the top level draft candidates (Rounds 1 -3 types). They trust in the reports of the scouting staff for giving them all of the information needed to make decisions on every guy, but mostly those late round guys.  If the GM and coaches could do it in the off season, there would be little need for teams to employ college regional scouts

That is incorrect.

 

A GM's job (and this is an overly simplistic version, it would take a few pages to really break it down) is to sit down with the coaches and determine the attributes they want in the players for each position.  They then decide the order of importance of the attributes and then they watch film (not of players to scout but of numerous players) get on the same page as to what constitutes "elite" of an attribute, "good" and of attribute" and "poor of an attribute".  And they do that for every attribute and every position, most positions are going to have 10-15 attributes.  And they they write it all down to hand to their scouts and then with their scouts they have meetings to do the same thing, show them film of what elite, good and poor looks like.

 

Then the scouts go out and grade players based on that information.  Good scouts take that information and do a good job of grading players based on the information given, poor scouts don't last long.  Good GMs know how to break a player down into attributes and fine tune what the coach is looking for.  But that process happens all year long.

 

That is why I think Grigs was a bad GM, he did not seem to get the coaches input on the attributes they wanted in a player, because, especially of defense, he seemed to draft the same type of players whether it was Manusky or Monachino.  A lot of that seemed to stem from Grigs thought he knew what made a good football player... he did not.  It is also why saying that Grigson scouted as the Colts GM is really not an accurate statement.  A scout takes information from others and grades a player based on that information.  A GM develops that information and a scout an only be as good as the information they are given to use as a basis.

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

19 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I see, so all other arguments that disagree with your view point are beside the point.

 

Got it.  Thanks for the correction. :

No.    Thats not my argument at all.

 

Honestly, you haven't made an argument that disagrees with my point.    You keep listing other things that a GM does and I simply say I don't care.

 

I haven't denied any of those issues.   I've simply said...   GMs also scout.   The key word is "also".   I even listed all of the ways they scout and you didn't deny one of them.

 

A GM does lots and lots of things...   he wears many hats...    and one of them is scout.   I don't know why we're arguing and debating?   What's to disagree with?

 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On 6/14/2018 at 6:00 PM, Coffeedrinker said:

He wasn't a scout for the Colts.

 

You're right, he wasn't just A scout, he was THE Head Scout for the Colts.

 

The Scoutmaster, if you will.

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

5 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

That is incorrect.

 

A GM's job (and this is an overly simplistic version, it would take a few pages to really break it down) is to sit down with the coaches and determine the attributes they want in the players for each position.  They then decide the order of importance of the attributes and then they watch film (not of players to scout but of numerous players) get on the same page as to what constitutes "elite" of an attribute, "good" and of attribute" and "poor of an attribute".  And they do that for every attribute and every position, most positions are going to have 10-15 attributes.  And they they write it all down to hand to their scouts and then with their scouts they have meetings to do the same thing, show them film of what elite, good and poor looks like.

 

Don't disagree, but this is done in the off season before the college (and Pro) games begin.

 

Quote

Then the scouts go out and grade players based on that information.  Good scouts take that information and do a good job of grading players based on the information given, poor scouts don't last long.  Good GMs know how to break a player down into attributes and fine tune what the coach is looking for.  But that process happens all year long.

 

The focus of the GM during the season is mostly the pro team on the field.

 

Quote

That is why I think Grigs was a bad GM, he did not seem to get the coaches input on the attributes they wanted in a player, because, especially of defense, he seemed to draft the same type of players whether it was Manusky or Monachino.  A lot of that seemed to stem from Grigs thought he knew what made a good football player... he did not.  It is also why saying that Grigson scouted as the Colts GM is really not an accurate statement.  A scout takes information from others and grades a player based on that information.  A GM develops that information and a scout an only be as good as the information they are given to use as a basis.

 

 

 

Now what I've imparted is not  incorrect.  It is not my my opinion, nor did I make it up. It certainly it doesn't go into the detail you added (as you said, there's even more to make a tldr statement).  But suffice to say, I got my information form Mark Dominik on SiriusXM NFL radio.  He has a course on GM and scouting-

 

https://www.sportsmanagementworldwide.com/courses/football-gm-scouting

 

And I've heard Pat Kirwan and Phil Savage make similar statements over the last year or two. The GM, during the season is concerned with the Pro team first and foremost (not the upcoming offseason draft at seasons end).  The college scouts are out on the road gathering their information. The Pro scouts are doing their thing, and they have the GM's ear because those are players that might be available, or soon to be, for consideration to adding to the roster.

 

Once the off season begins the GM, coaches begin to do their scouting, the film work, attend bowl/all-star games, go to combine and pro days. This consumes their time and it is mostly draft slot round 1-3 guys getting their attention in these events.  They do not have the time to film study 6th round LB's or 7th round long snappers or even do film study for UDFA QB's.

 

I can see the director of college scouting talking with the GM some during the season, but it is not priority.  The Pro team on the field is.

[Coffeedrinker]

45 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Don't disagree, but this is done in the off season before the college (and Pro) games begin.

 

 

The focus of the GM during the season is mostly the pro team on the field.

 

 

Now what I've imparted is not  incorrect.  It is not my my opinion, nor did I make it up. It certainly it doesn't go into the detail you added (as you said, there's even more to make a tldr statement).  But suffice to say, I got my information form Mark Dominik on SiriusXM NFL radio.  He has a course on GM and scouting-

 

https://www.sportsmanagementworldwide.com/courses/football-gm-scouting

 

And I've heard Pat Kirwan and Phil Savage make similar statements over the last year or two. The GM, during the season is concerned with the Pro team first and foremost (not the upcoming offseason draft at seasons end).  The college scouts are out on the road gathering their information. The Pro scouts are doing their thing, and they have the GM's ear because those are players that might be available, or soon to be, for consideration to adding to the roster.

 

Once the off season begins the GM, coaches begin to do their scouting, the film work, attend bowl/all-star games, go to combine and pro days. This consumes their time and it is mostly draft slot round 1-3 guys getting their attention in these events.  They do not have the time to film study 6th round LB's or 7th round long snappers or even do film study for UDFA QB's.

 

I can see the director of college scouting talking with the GM some during the season, but it is not priority.  The Pro team on the field is.

The only part that was incorrect that it's done in the offseason.  All aspects that I mentioned are done all year round.  A coach may change an attribute that it's important, they may change what they consider elite/good/poor and they discuss that all with the GM.  They definitely do more of it during the offseason because they have more time for it.  But that kind of stuff doesn't stop when the season starts.

[Dark Superman]

How does this guy keep getting jobs in the NFL?

[Fat Clemenza]

 

On 6/16/2018 at 5:20 PM, ColtsBlueFL said:

Once the off season begins the GM, coaches begin to do their scouting, the film work, attend bowl/all-star games, go to combine and pro days.

Makes sense

 

On 6/16/2018 at 12:32 PM, NewColtsFan said:

A GM does lots and lots of things...   he wears many hats...    and one of them is scout.   I don't know why we're arguing and debating?   What's to disagree with?

Makes sesnse

 

On 6/16/2018 at 12:28 PM, Coffeedrinker said:

A lot of that seemed to stem from Grigs thought he knew what made a good football player... he did not. 

I totally agree.  Doesn't that also kinda mean, in some way at least, that in his role as GM Grigs was not good at scouting?

[ColtsBlueFL]

55 minutes ago, Fat Clemenza said:

I totally agree.  Doesn't that also kinda mean, in some way at least, that in his role as GM Grigs was not good at scouting?

 

True, it does in at least some form or respect.  According to various sources for Grigson's resume' -

 

He played college football for the Purdue Boilermakers from 1991–1994.

Drafted by the Cincinnati Bengals in the 1994 draft

Scout for the St. Louis Rams from 1999-2003

Hired by the Eagles as a western regional scout in 2004

Promoted to director of college scouting 2006

Promoted to director of player personnel in 2010

 

According to some others, there was the bad-
 

"The difference between Louis Riddick and Ryan Grigson, if I was an owner and had to choose between the two of them is like the difference between Steph and like a D-league point guard. They weren’t even in the same {bleep edit} realm. I mean they were in different universes."

 

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/former-philadelphia-eagles-scout-rips-colts-gm-ryan-grigson/

 

and for some others, the good-

 

Grigson was one of (Eagles) General Manager Howie Roseman's most trusted advisers.

 

"Although we will miss Ryan personally and professionally we could not be happier for him," Roseman said in a prepared statement released by the Eagles. "He has been a great adviser to me and somebody I have leaned on to bounce ideas off of many times over my career. He leaves no stone left unturned in his efforts to find good players and we were lucky to have him here in Philadelphia. In addition to his skills as a talent evaluator, we cant say enough about Ryan as a person. He is one of the best family men I have come across in the NFL and we wish he, Cynthia and his children all the best."

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/philadelphia-eagles/colts-hire-eagles-grigson-gm

 

Ryan, at the minimum, is polarizing.

 

 

[Coffeedrinker]

54 minutes ago, Fat Clemenza said:

 

Makes sense

 

Makes sesnse

 

I totally agree.  Doesn't that also kinda mean, in some way at least, that in his role as GM Grigs was not good at scouting?

Not from the way I'm breaking it down.  If Grigs was not good at scouting he would not have risen through the ranks with the Eagles.  I wasn't there, I didn't read his scouting reports so I don't know for sure, all I can use is that fact that he kept getting promoted as a scout. 

 

And I don't know how I can explain this any more clearly.  Think of it like an assembly line work.  The assembling line work may be excellent at his job, have some good ideas on improvement and gets promoted up through the ranks to line manager and he does that very well.  Then he gets a job where, instead of making his line the best it can be he has to decide what parts are going to be ran now and every year for the next 5 years.  Some people can make that jump, some people cannot.  Grigson was good when he was finding what he was told to find.  He was not good at deciding what needed to be found.