NFLs Best GMs in 2015

[amfootball]

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/53473/57/nfls-best-gms-2015?pg=1

 

Rotoworld did their annual ranking of the GMs 1-32.

 

Belichick came in at #1, no surprise there. Number 2 was Ozzie. Elway came at number 5 not sure why as I would not have him that high. Grigson came in at #11 which seems low to me.

[Dustin]

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/53473/57/nfls-best-gms-2015?pg=1

 

Rotoworld did their annual ranking of the GMs 1-32.

 

Belichick came in at #1, no surprise there. Number 2 was Ozzie. Elway came at number 5 not sure why as I would not have him that high. Grigson came in at #11 which seems low to me.

 

#11 seems high to me. 

[amfootball]

#11 seems high to me. 

Really? The write up on Elway was throwing bouquets at his feet yet all his success has been predicated on landing Manning. Yet for Grigson they say he just needed a pulse to draft Luck and that explains his success. Seems a bit hypocritical to me. But I will bite. Why do you think Grigson should be lower besides the Richardson trade?

[Dustin]

Really? The write up on Elway was throwing bouquets at his feet yet all his success has been predicated on landing Manning. Yet for Grigson they say he just needed a pulse to draft Luck and that explains his success. Seems a bit hypocritical to me. But I will bite. Why do you think Grigson should be lower besides the Richardson trade?

 

the team outside of the QB is stunningly mediocre and filled with a bunch of JAGs. Least amount of draft selections since 2012, entire projected defense is filled with free agents aside from nose tackle, gave out big contracts to mediocre players who have been cut (or will be soon).

 

Promised a great offensive line, still about how good it was when he first got here, hasn't built a running game, hasn't built a good defense, team gets blown out more often than bottom feeders like the Browns and Jaguars do.

 

But hey he's got Andrew Luck and plays in the AFC South so here's to another decade of get carried by a QB!

[Dustin]

Also no building block players on defense and has wasted two first round picks in a row. 

[#BringBobBack]

how in the world is Mickey Loomis ahead of Grigson though i get that grigson has made mistakes and decisions i don't agree with but the saints has been in salary cap hell for awhile which we haven't come close to and looked like a dumpster fire all last year

[Valpo2004]

Really? The write up on Elway was throwing bouquets at his feet yet all his success has been predicated on landing Manning. Yet for Grigson they say he just needed a pulse to draft Luck and that explains his success. Seems a bit hypocritical to me. But I will bite. Why do you think Grigson should be lower besides the Richardson trade?

 

To be fair Elway had to actually had to court Manning to come to Denver while Ryan Grigson had to just draft Luck.

 

That said I don't see how Mike Brown/Marvin Lewis, Jerry Reese and Mickey Loomis get in ahead of Grigson.  The Bengals can't win a playoff game against anyone and arn't really that dominate in the regular season either.  

 

Jerry Reese has not been able to give the Giants sustained success, his SB wins are more Couglin then good roster building.  

 

And the Saints got caught in cap trouble and just traded away their best non quarterback player because of it. 

[Dustin]

To be fair Elway had to actually had to court Manning to come to Denver while Ryan Grigson had to just draft Luck.

 

That said I don't see how Mike Brown/Marvin Lewis, Jerry Reese and Mickey Loomis get in ahead of Grigson.  The Bengals can't win a playoff game against anyone and arn't really that dominate in the regular season either.  

 

Jerry Reese has not been able to give the Giants sustained success, his SB wins are more Couglin then good roster building.  

 

And the Saints got caught in cap trouble and just traded away their best non quarterback player because of it. 

 

Switch Andy Dalton and Andrew Luck. What the narrative on Grigson vs that of Brown/Lewis? Does Grigson even still have a job? 

[crazycolt1]

the team outside of the QB is stunningly mediocre and filled with a bunch of JAGs. Least amount of draft selections since 2012, entire projected defense is filled with free agents aside from nose tackle, gave out big contracts to mediocre players who have been cut (or will be soon).

 

Promised a great offensive line, still about how good it was when he first got here, hasn't built a running game, hasn't built a good defense, team gets blown out more often than bottom feeders like the Browns and Jaguars do.

 

But hey he's got Andrew Luck and plays in the AFC South so here's to another decade of get carried by a QB!

So let me get this right? Grigson has taken a completely rebuilt team to three strait playoffs. Two division titles. The AFC championship game. All with dealing with serious cap issues when starting. He has the Colts at this point in very good shape as far as the cap issues are and into the future. He has won GM of the year in his very first year with the job he has done. He never rest as far as looking and finding talent while competing with 31 other GMs. But yet you have him ranked lower than where he is? I would think you would be a little more knowledgeable about what running a NFL team is. I guess your memory is very poor about the wins over the losses over the last three years.

[Dustin]

So let me get this right? Grigson has taken a completely rebuilt team to three strait playoffs. Two division titles. The AFC championship game. All with dealing with serious cap issues when starting. He has the Colts at this point in very good shape as far as the cap issues are and into the future. He has won GM of the year in his very first year with the job he has done. He never rest as far as looking and finding talent while competing with 31 other GMs. But yet you have him ranked lower than where he is? I would think you would be a little more knowledgeable about what running a NFL team is. I guess your memory is very poor about the wins over the losses over the last three years.

 

#GMWINZ

 

Yes, Grigson's roster is awful. 

[Dustin]

A big reason why I'm fine with Pagano is because of how much he overcomes the FOs roster management. 

[crazycolt1]

#GMWINZ

 

Yes, Grigson's roster is awful. 

Sorry, you are in a small minority with that thought. You have taken a personal issue and let it cloud your thought process.

[Dustin]

Sorry, you are in a small minority with that thought. You have taken a personal issue and let it cloud your thought process.

 

What could I possibly have that is personal against Grigson? 

 

He is just a terrible roster builder. 

[Dustin]

Also no building block players on defense and has wasted two first round picks in a row. 

 

Also traded away Jerry Hughes. 

[NewColtsFan]

You'll have to forgive Dustin....

 

When it comes to Grigson, he's completely mentally deranged,  unbalanced and off his meds. 

 

There is simply no reasoning with him.

 

As to Elway,  all he's done is get rid of Josh McDaniels and Tim Tebow.    Brought in Peyton Manning and John Fox.   Won 46 games in 4 years and an AFC Title and got his team to the Super Bowl.   And now he's turned around and gotten rid of Fox and moved on to Gary Kubiak. 

 

And you wonder what he's done to deserve being ranked 5th?!?    

[GoPats]

Sorry, you are in a small minority with that thought. You have taken a personal issue and let it cloud your thought process.

 

Haven't you said before that, with a mediocre QB instead of Luck, the Colts would be an 8-8 team at best? Or am I mixing you up with someone else? (If so I apologize.)

 

The "new" Colts seem so similar to the "old" Colts to me. Great QB who covers up a lot of flaws, not great on the lines, pretty soft D. 

[Dustin]

Haven't you said before that, with a mediocre QB instead of Luck, the Colts would be an 8-8 team at best? Or am I mixing you up with someone else? (If so I apologize.)

 

A lot of people have. 

 

It's "Luck is so good because he IS the team, put Luck on the Seahawks and they would have won 3 super bowls last year!"

 

and then you criticize Grigson for being a bad roster builder and the same people will go:

 

"LOL 3 playoffs in a row!" 

[Dustin]

And the Colts are a lot worse than 8-8 without Luck. He's worth more than 3 wins. 

[GoPats]

And the Colts are a lot worse than 8-8 without Luck. He's worth more than 3 wins. 

 

Depends on the replacement but yes, for sure. 

[Gramz]

As to Elway, all he's done is get rid of Josh McDanields and Tim Tebow. Brought in Peyton Manning and John Fox. Won 46 games in 4 years and an AFC Title and got his team to the Super Bowl.

And you wonder what he's done to deserve being ranked 5th?!?

Liking this part of your post.

I do think the rankings are for last season, and that may be why someone is questioning. ????

But I agree with you, that he has done good things to get his team in a position to win. He's done his part. Just sayin'...

[Superman]

The "new" Colts seem so similar to the "old" Colts to me. Great QB who covers up a lot of flaws, not great on the lines, pretty soft D. 

 

The difference is that this version of the Colts is only three years in, and hasn't had that soft defense for a solid decade.

 

Grigson is three years in. A lot of his criticism comes from misusing two straight first rounders. That's a big deal, but once you go past that, he's been working on turning around a roster that was threadbare when he took over. I think he deserves a lot more credit than some give him, and I think the narrative that you're describing here -- and that's been used many times -- is lacking in context.

[Bluefire4]

Also traded away Jerry Hughes. 

Hindsight on that one.

[Dustin]

Hindsight on that one.

 

No it wasn't. He played well the year before and Kelvin Sheppard was a borderline rosterable player. 

 

Even if he wasn't "as good" as he is now, it was still dumb to trade away a decent pass rusher for a bad linebacker. 

[Bluefire4]

No it wasn't. He played well the year before and Kelvin Sheppard was a borderline rosterable player. 

 

Even if he wasn't "as good" as he is now, it was still dumb to trade away a decent pass rusher for a bad linebacker. 

Absolutely no one here complained about the trade. I remember because I was against the trade and was excited for what Hughes would bring that year and I came on here after he was traded and nobody cared. It was bust for bust,

[Dustin]

Absolutely no one here complained about the trade. 

 

I did. 

 

The general consensus around the Bills boards is that this dude sucks. TBH I would rather have kept Hughes. He was solid in rotational time as a pass rusher.

 

[dgambill]

Grigson has made several bad moves but made several good ones as well. Moving up to get TY. Trading for Davis. Moncrief looks like a solid pick as well. Two TEs back to back was gutsy but seems to be working ok. Hired Pagano and Arians and then Hamilton so he has done pretty decent in the coaching decisions. Most importantly is he has done a GREAT job handling the cap. Even when he wiffs we have cap friendly deals we can get out of. Then this year landing AJ, Gore, Coles, Herrimans, Langford are pretty solid signings. I agree he has been very hit and miss in the draft so I understand a top 10 ranking. That said he did this all from scratch...and to build a playoff team every year has to count for something.

 

Elway I think is placed well...he has put together a roster full of talent...just because they failed back to back years due to some critical injuries 2013 on defensive side of the ball and this past on the offensive at bad times doesn't mean he didn't do a good job. Every year they have upgraded and are set to have 10 picks this year and probably another 10 picks for next year and if they could get DT signed to a long term deal they easily would have more cap space to spend. He has built a good team.

 

Can't argue with Bill....what he did last offseason was brilliant...renting Revis for a year for a SB ring was well worth it. They make prudent decisions that typically pay off. He and Ozzie I think do a great job running their organizations. I think the Giants do too just they have had a lot of injuries over the past few years but they have typically scouted well.

[Bluefire4]

I did. 

I found the forum from when he was traded and the only one who really had a opposition to it was TKnight but it looked like he even began to be reassured. Everyone else was indifferent or praising Grigson for finding a potential starter in Sheppard.

[amfootball]

You'll have to forgive Dustin....

 

When it comes to Grigson, he's completely mentally deranged,  unbalanced and off his meds. 

 

There is simply no reasoning with him.

 

As to Elway,  all he's done is get rid of Josh McDaniels and Tim Tebow.    Brought in Peyton Manning and John Fox.   Won 46 games in 4 years and an AFC Title and got his team to the Super Bowl.   And now he's turned around and gotten rid of Fox and moved on to Gary Kubiak. 

 

And you wonder what he's done to deserve being ranked 5th?!?    

Regarding Elway, getting rid of McDaniels and Tebow were no brainers. He deserves credit for landing Manning but criticism for hiring Fox who was may be the worst mis-match for Manning given he is a run first, play defense type of HC who Elway ultimately ended up firing so not sure how that reflects well on him. Now he has brought in his buddy in Kubiak who has a worse offensive system for Manning to try and run at age 39 and replaced Del Rio with Phillips on the defensive side which is a down grade.

[GoPats]

The difference is that this version of the Colts is only three years in, and hasn't had that soft defense for a solid decade.

 

Grigson is three years in. A lot of his criticism comes from misusing two straight first rounders. That's a big deal, but once you go past that, he's been working on turning around a roster that was threadbare when he took over. I think he deserves a lot more credit than some give him, and I think the narrative that you're describing here -- and that's been used many times -- is lacking in context.

 

Sure, it's always difficult to get a good feel for another team, their inner workings, their standing with their fan base, etc. I'm going based on what I do see/read/hear. The same things always come up with Indy fans.

 

"We have no offensive line."

 

"We can't stop the run."

 

Etc-etc... 

[Surge89]

Absolutely no one here complained about the trade. 

 

You must have a mislead memory.  There was a group of people (me included) that knew Hughes was a much higher value player than Sheppard and it wasn't close.  And that was without even knowing he would blossom in Buffalo.  

[Surge89]

The difference is that this version of the Colts is only three years in, and hasn't had that soft defense for a solid decade.

 

Grigson is three years in. A lot of his criticism comes from misusing two straight first rounders. That's a big deal, but once you go past that, he's been working on turning around a roster that was threadbare when he took over. I think he deserves a lot more credit than some give him, and I think the narrative that you're describing here -- and that's been used many times -- is lacking in context.

 

The issue is he is doing the same mistakes as the previous regime which I believe is (partly) true.  If you are going to make the lines a priority then you either A. Spend a high pick on a player (which he did due for the Offense)  or B. Overspend money on a FA cornerstone (which he hasn't done).  The only improvement I see is that he is more willing to swing in FA than Polian which is very credible but the way he swings is my issue.  He "seems" (imo) to value quantity over quality, what I see FA as you spend money on an impact player and bring it lower tiered help later for depth at virtually no cost.  Not sign your whole defense with a bunch of mediocre talent and over spend for that talent.  

 

Even with all of that said though I'm willing to give Grigson this draft to change.  Hopefully he has a plan in which he is going to draft heavily into defense and start spinning this around. If he does and believe in drafting for core and supplementing with FA then I think I will be quite fine with Grigson.  But he's got a lot of ground to cover.

[Valpo2004]

Sure, it's always difficult to get a good feel for another team, their inner workings, their standing with their fan base, etc. I'm going based on what I do see/read/hear. The same things always come up with Indy fans.

 

"We have no offensive line."

 

"We can't stop the run."

 

Etc-etc... 

 

To be fair the O-line has gotten better every year.  Under Grigson I can't look at one year and say the previous year's team was better.  

[Superman]

Sure, it's always difficult to get a good feel for another team, their inner workings, their standing with their fan base, etc. I'm going based on what I do see/read/hear. The same things always come up with Indy fans.

 

"We have no offensive line."

 

"We can't stop the run."

 

Etc-etc... 

 

Those pre-date Grigson, is my point. He's had three years, and going from a roster in shambles to a team that has 33 wins in three seasons (and three playoff wins; compare those numbers to teams with more reputable coaches, or more talented rosters...) is worthy of recognition. We're still working on the offensive line and the run defense, but the run defense has already improved, so long as we're not playing the Pats.

 

Anyways, Grigson isn't the greatest. I haven't really looked at the list, but I think #11 is fair. But when you step back and look at how far ahead of schedule this team has been under his watch, I think most of the criticism is overblown. This year is where I think he's under the microscope. So far, I think he's done a good job this offseason, but the draft will be huge.

[Superman]

The issue is he is doing the same mistakes as the previous regime which I believe is (partly) true.  If you are going to make the lines a priority then you either A. Spend a high pick on a player (which he did due for the Offense)  or B. Overspend money on a FA cornerstone (which he hasn't done).  The only improvement I see is that he is more willing to swing in FA than Polian which is very credible but the way he swings is my issue.  He "seems" (imo) to value quantity over quality, what I see FA as you spend money on an impact player and bring it lower tiered help later for depth at virtually no cost.  Not sign your whole defense with a bunch of mediocre talent and over spend for that talent.  

 

Even with all of that said though I'm willing to give Grigson this draft to change.  Hopefully he has a plan in which he is going to draft heavily into defense and start spinning this around. If he does and believe in drafting for core and supplementing with FA then I think I will be quite fine with Grigson.  But he's got a lot of ground to cover.

 

I disagree with the bolded.

 

Polian's drafting fell off, and he refused to supplement his drafting with free agency. He had built a contender through the draft, but he failed to maintain that contender through the draft, and struggled with acquiring difference makers on the interior of both lines. He also made some bad calls with his own free agents, letting some guys walk (Jake Scott), and overpaying others (Brackett, Hayden, etc.) This went on for several years, and toward the end of his time here -- really, from 2008 on -- the roster erosion was obvious. It all came to a head in 2011, but that was in the making for a long time.

 

Grigson also wants to build his roster through the draft. But he has used free agency to supplement his drafting, knowing that it takes time to draft enough difference makers to really improve your team, including development and roster balance. For instance, three years in, we have no drafted defensive backs. He's only had 22 draft picks, yet he's replaced 90% of the roster (and two of the holdovers are specialists). So he's added starter level players in free agency, and maybe he's paid a little more than he should have, but none of those decisions have hurt the team or the cap, and the team can pay as it goes. Without those free agents, this team doesn't win 11 games the last three years. He had to restock the pitiful roster that Polian had left behind, and do so with a rookie head coach and a rookie QB. Some shortcuts were taken, but they mostly paid off.

 

Grigson's problem is that his drafts haven't raised the collective talent level on the roster the way they should have. The 2013 draft is full of wasted opportunities, and then he spent his 2014 first rounder on Richardson. We should have another 3-5 young difference makers on the roster right now. I think he got back on track with the 2014 draft, but he has to string back to back drafts together. Because of those misses, the roster still has some holes were it probably shouldn't. 

 

As for not going after top notch free agents, the truth is that history is unfavorable and condemnatory toward GMs who spend big money on free agents. Most of them don't work out, either due to being poor fits or getting injured. They're all overpaid. The majority fail to finish out their contracts. If you swing and miss on a big free agent, the trickle down is even worse than wasting a first rounder, because not only don't you have the player you wanted, you also have spent huge money on him.

[RockThatBlue]

Also traded away Jerry Hughes.

Didn't Hughes even admit that he didn't want to be here? Seems like a good idea to not have a player who would rather not be here.

[Superman]

Didn't Hughes even admit that he didn't want to be here? Seems like a good idea to not have a player who would rather not be here.

 

The Hughes trade seems weird to me for several reasons, but I think we probably could have done better than Kelvin Sheppard.

[RockThatBlue]

The Hughes trade seems weird to me for several reasons, but I think we probably could have done better than Kelvin Sheppard.

I won't disagree with you there.

[dgambill]

Grigson has done well...not great but well. I mean it can take years to take a bad team to great even WITH a franchise qb. Polian did a great job during the 2000s building this team. I would say it fell off at the end for sure but putting together one of the best teams of the 2000s in the one that lost to Pittsburgh in 2005 was SB worthy...won one in 2006...and we had a great chance to win again in 2009....so it takes time to put those type of teams together...and Grigson seems to be on his way. However if he flops with the draft again or these FAs fail to make a difference than yeah...we may see us go another route...but from worst to AFC Championship game in 3 years...playoffs all 3 years...that has to count for something.

[Bluefire4]

You must have a mislead memory.  There was a group of people (me included) that knew Hughes was a much higher value player than Sheppard and it wasn't close.  And that was without even knowing he would blossom in Buffalo.  

 

 

I checked the thread made about it when the trade happened and seen very little opposition.. actually most people believed Sheppard would be good and start for us. Point being that you can't say Grigson was stupid for trading Hughes when most people were in agreement that he was a bust and nobody expected him to turn out this well.

[Superman]

I checked the thread made about it when the trade happened and seen very little opposition.. actually most people believed Sheppard would be good and start for us. Point being that you can't say Grigson was stupid for trading Hughes when most people were in agreement that he was a bust and nobody expected him to turn out this well.

 

To the bolded, I think you can. I think you'd just have to lump everyone else in with him. Just because it was a popular opinion doesn't mean it's above reproach.

 

I still think the Hughes trade was about more than just football, but that doesn't mean it was a good trade.