Is Grigson a "Control Freak"...And Does It Matter

[Superman]

That's all a conjecture. Separate what we know from what we don't. Is it likely, yes, is it confirmed yet, not at all. If someone can find me a primary source stating Grigson controls the line-up, I will agree.

 

The article says this information is coming from players. May or may not be accurate, and I'm not calling it proof, but it qualifies as evidence. 

[Superman]

And if he does? (not putting you on the spot, just interested in your take) And if he doesn't? Then what? (this is the biggest ? for me!)

 

If Irsay has authorized Grigson to exert this kind of influence, then there's technically nothing out of bounds about what Grigson is reportedly doing. In fact, it's his job, as directed by Irsay, his boss. 

 

I don't like it, either way, but it's one thing to say that Grigson is butting in where he ought not, and another thing to say that Irsay has created an environment of conflict and discontent. If any/all of this is true, I definitely hope it's Grigson going rogue, and not Irsay giving him this authority expressly. However, the Polian era featured plenty of GM overreach, if reports are to be believed, especially when Caldwell was the coach. It's not unprecedented in Irsay's front office.

[Corndog]

That's all a conjecture. Separate what we know from what we don't. Is it likely, yes, is it confirmed yet, not at all. If someone can find me a primary source stating Grigson controls the line-up, I will agree.

Too bad the players in Holden's article didn't go public, is that what you want?  It's not a good situation, but it is definitely a good thing it has primarily stayed internal, it shows we have professionals on this team.  They are dealing with the situation internally and voicing their concerns, while trying to galvanize the team.   The only way it would be confirmed is either the players talk about it publicly, or either Irsay/Grigson/Pagano confirm it publicly.  That may never happen, at the earliest it happens in the offseason or is confirmed by actions.  Even then, some will be in denial.  

[Mr. Irrelevant]

I don't like it, either way, but it's one thing to say that Grigson is butting in where he ought not, and another thing to say that Irsay has created an environment of conflict and discontent. If any/all of this is true, I definitely hope it's Grigson going rogue, and not Irsay giving him this authority expressly.

 

This is my big fear, because then this team will never get a good HC going.

 

I'm concerned that Irsay has f*#%ed something up, and this is why Pagano has said that he might not be here next year - which in effect has created player discontent.

 

Let us see how things go with Chud as OC, but I'm pointing the finger at Irsay as it stands now. Might not be the most popular thing to do, but it is my gut feeling.

[jvan1973]

This is my big fear, because then this team will never get a good HC going.

I'm concerned that Irsay has f*#%ed something up, and this why Pagano has said that he might not be here next year - which in effect has created player discontent.

Let's how things go with Chud as OC, but I'm pointing the finger at Irsay as it stands now. Might not be the most popular thing to do, but it is my gut feeling.

When did pagano say he might not be here next year? I know he doesn't have a contract, but I haven't heard him address that situation

[Superman]

Too bad the players in Holden's article didn't go public, is that what you want?  It's not a good situation, but it is definitely a good thing it has primarily stayed internal, it shows we have professionals on this team.  They are dealing with the situation internally and voicing their concerns, while trying to galvanize the team.   The only way it would be confirmed is either the players talk about it publicly, or either Irsay/Grigson/Pagano confirm it publicly.  That may never happen, at the earliest it happens in the offseason or is confirmed by actions.  Even then, some will be in denial.  

 

Obviously no players are gonna go public, but I would like for Holder to actually say that HE HIMSELF has heard this from players. Because his article doesn't express that directly.

[Mr. Irrelevant]

When did pagano say he might not be here next year? I know he doesn't have a contract, but I haven't heard him address that situation

 

Sorry, he didn't said that in public, but according to Ian Rapoport  "Chuck Pagano has told people he has doubts he returns to Indy next year."

 

http://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/648117820866363392

 

Ian Rapoport is one of the few I trust, but I can't blame you if you doesn't.

[Superman]

This is my big fear, because then this team will never get a good HC going.

 

I'm concerned that Irsay has f*#%ed something up, and this is why Pagano has said that he might not be here next year - which in effect has created player discontent.

 

Let us see how things go with Chud as OC, but I'm pointing the finger at Irsay as it stands now. Might not be the most popular thing to do, but it is my gut feeling.

 

Irsay definitely is not perfect.

 

And going back through his history, he's been a personnel guy in the past. He's not a businessman coming into the NFL green, looking for an expensive hobby. He would never be totally hands off, because of that; he was a GM when he was in his 20s, and sole owner by age 37. He's a football man. It wouldn't surprise me that he would be more hands on now than he was in the past, when he could defer to older, more experienced men like Polian and Dungy.

 

This started out as rumors, and maybe there's nothing to it. Maybe the players have started to be affected by all the noise, and what they think they've seen and heard is influenced by what they've been reading about this for the past six months. 

 

But this report -- about players believing that typical coaching decisions are out of Pagano's control -- seems more substantial than anything else. And if it goes all the way up to Irsay, then like you say, it's a bigger problem than any of us expected.

 

IF...

[rockywoj]

At the end of the day I think all of this disharmony is simply due to the fact that Pagano is apparently a lame duck coach.  Whomever was responsible for his contract, whether that be Grigson or Irsay, the person responsible messed up because I stand by my previously stated thought that you do NOT go into a year with a lame duck coach.  When you do, well, you all see what happens.

 

Pagano should have either been extended or let go.  If he was extended for more than the one year like he apparently wanted, then I don't think that any of the Grigson / Pagano riff talk even happens.  I am going to believe that Pagano's contract status is on Irsay, so I will say I think it is Irsay that messed up, which created the environment that gave rise to all of this riff talk, whether or not it's true.

[ColtRider]

If Irsay has authorized Grigson to exert this kind of influence, then there's technically nothing out of bounds about what Grigson is reportedly doing. In fact, it's his job, as directed by Irsay, his boss. 

 

I don't like it, either way, but it's one thing to say that Grigson is butting in where he ought not, and another thing to say that Irsay has created an environment of conflict and discontent. If any/all of this is true, I definitely hope it's Grigson going rogue, and not Irsay giving him this authority expressly. However, the Polian era featured plenty of GM overreach, if reports are to be believed, especially when Caldwell was the coach. It's not unprecedented in Irsay's front office.

Thanks for the reply, MOS. Yep. I'm of the same notion and consensus. Regardless of what's been going down, the bottom line goes without saying that these decisions, I would hope, points to the betterment of the team. And, if that's the case, we all have to live with it.

Good or bad. Just want to see the Ws we all are accustomed to. However, roughing out the weeds can be a tough thing sometimes.

And, that doesn't exclude the Indianapolis Colts! Hey, you guys have a GREAT several weeks ahead. October-December are my traveling months during the year. Love this forum and its members. See y'all in December.

GO COLTS!

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Irsay definitely is not perfect.

 

And going back through his history, he's been a personnel guy in the past. He's not a businessman coming into the NFL green, looking for an expensive hobby. He would never be totally hands off, because of that; he was a GM when he was in his 20s, and sole owner by age 37. He's a football man. It wouldn't surprise me that he would be more hands on now than he was in the past, when he could defer to older, more experienced men like Polian and Dungy.

 

This started out as rumors, and maybe there's nothing to it. Maybe the players have started to be affected by all the noise, and what they think they've seen and heard is influenced by what they've been reading about this for the past six months. 

 

But this report -- about players believing that typical coaching decisions are out of Pagano's control -- seems more substantial than anything else. And if it goes all the way up to Irsay, then like you say, it's a bigger problem than any of us expected.

 

IF...

 

Big IF, no doubt.

 

But whether it is true or false, it is Irsay's responsibility to put the fire out, because it has hurt the organization that all this turmoil has been allowed to go on for so long. True or false, the fire has to stop now. As simple as that, as complicated as that.

[Jonathan24]

Duron didn't make the roster because he's not good enough to play at a high level in the NFL.

 

So Dorsett can?

[jvan1973]

Sorry, he didn't said that in public, but according to Ian Rapoport "Chuck Pagano has told people he has doubts he returns to Indy next year."

http://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/648117820866363392

Ian Rapoport is one of the few I trust, but I can't blame you if you doesn't.

No, I can buy him saying it off the record.

[Jonathan24]

That's a conjecture.

 

Are you sure?? The players holding a players only meeting?  I guess they are doing that for fun. Grigs needed to validate his drafting on dorsett.  Couldnt have a CFL guy or a so called return specialist beat out his #1 pick..

[Gavin]

So Dorsett can?

I think he has made it very clear he can in his limited chances

[Jason_]

So Dorsett can?

 

Who do you think is more likely to clear waivers?  

 

Phillip Dorsett - had just been selected as a 1st round pick

Duron Carter - went through the draft process in 2013 but went undrafted, tried out with the Vikings but could not earn a contract so spent 2 years playing in Canada

 

This should not be a difficult decision.  I'm getting that you're just mad that Grigson selected a WR in the first round, but that does not mean that Duron Carter should have made the roster over Dorsett.  It also does not mean that selecting a WR in round 1 was a total mistake.  

[Superman]

Big IF, no doubt.

 

But whether it is true or false, it is Irsay's responsibility to put the fire out, because it has hurt the organization that all this turmoil has been allowed to go on for so long. True or false, the fire has to stop now. As simple as that, as complicated as that.

 

He made his statement addressing the noise earlier this year. No one believed him because everyone's mind was already made up. Nothing else he can do, from where I sit, except start firing people. 

[Jonathan24]

Who do you think is more likely to clear waivers?  

 

Phillip Dorsett - had just been selected as a 1st round pick

Duron Carter - went through the draft process in 2013 but went undrafted, tried out with the Vikings but could not earn a contract so spent 2 years playing in Canada

 

This should not be a difficult decision.  I'm getting that you're just mad that Grigson selected a WR in the first round, but that does not mean that Duron Carter should have made the roster over Dorsett.  It also does not mean that selecting a WR in round 1 was a total mistake.  

 

Who would've thought that trent richardson would not be on a team after being selected in the first.  Not saying that Dorsett should've been cut considering his draft selection but I feel duron would've giving good competition for the #4 if he had made the roster.

[Superman]

So Dorsett can?

 

Dorsett >>>>>>>> Carter

[Superman]

Who would've thought that trent richardson would not be on a team after being selected in the first.  Not saying that Dorsett should've been cut considering his draft selection but I feel duron would've giving good competition for the #4 if he had made the roster.

 

It's like you didn't watch preseason at all. Carter is a long way from being worthy of a roster spot. Or at least he was; I don't know what he looks like right now.

[DougDew]

But this report -- about players believing that typical coaching decisions are out of Pagano's control --

The way you wrote that gives the impression that Grigson is routinely making these decisions.

Technically, if Grigson wanted to start Harrison at C and Pagano wanted AQ, I guess that one decision for more than one game would qualify as "making coaching and lineup decisions typically reserved for the HC" which is also how Holder expressed it.

Is that change really that big of a deal? Pagano wants to win now, and Grigs wants to see what he has, in a season where they were going to the playoffs anyway. Pagano is going to whine about that, and Grigs is going to get fired over that? What an overreaction either would be. The entire G and C positions are made up of a grab-bag of 3s 4s UDFAs and mediocre vets. What's the difference.

[Jonathan24]

Dorsett >>>>>>>> Carter

 

I agree, im not arguing about dorsetts ceiling... coaches don't rant and rave on a player like they did with duron..  My argument is how much grigs had a say so in not carrying the amount of WR's that the colts usually carry.

[SteelDragon]

Is Grigson a control freak? Probably. There sure are a number of reports pointing in that direction.

Does it matter? I'm sure this goes on in other organizations. These GMS have their livelihood in the hands of head coaches. The very nature of a GM- competitiveness, extreme attention to detail, organizing the team structure, tracking thousands of players in and out of the league, constantly watching for the waiver wire and potential trades, constantly assessing team needs..... these guys are obsessive/compulsive, TYPE A personalities.

My guess is meddling becomes a problem if Grigs is demanding a TRICH, DHB, Werner, etc be a starter. As far as I can tell, we have the right people starting now. If he meddles in the actual play-calling that could be a problem.

[DougDew]

Is Grigson a control freak? Probably. There sure are a number of reports pointing in that direction.

Or else its the same one being fed to multiple outlets...

Its the age of technology. Nobody does field work anymore. They sit in their office and use the internet to cut and paste.

[Superman]

The way you wrote that gives the impression that Grigson is routinely making these decisions.

Technically, if Grigson wanted to start Harrison at C and Pagano wanted AQ, I guess that one decision for more than one game would qualify as "making coaching and lineup decisions typically reserved for the HC" which is also how Holder expressed it.

Is that change really that big of a deal? Pagano wants to win now, and Grigs wants to see what he has, in a season where they were going to the playoffs anyway. Pagano is going to whine about that, and Grigs is going to get fired over that? What an overreaction either would be. The entire G and C positions are made up of a grab-bag of 3s 4s UDFAs and mediocre vets. What's the difference.

 

It's not how I wrote it. It's the impression given in Holder's article. And I concluded with a big IF.

 

My point was just that this article seems to have legs, whereas I didn't think much of anything that's come before it.

 

I'm the last person to have a problem with the Shipley/Harrison decision, no matter who made it. But typically speaking, that decision should be made by the coaches.

[Smash Mouth]

He made his statement addressing the noise earlier this year. No one believed him because everyone's mind was already made up. Nothing else he can do, from where I sit, except start firing people. 

Just seems like the atmosphere in that building is so toxic.  The player's only meeting is the tell on this.  If they are left to themselves to try and block out the noise because the supposed adults can't behave themselves, then its on Irsay.  I'm looking at what the Ford Family has done in Detroit.  They are tired of the failure and blew it all up.  I think the players need to know the owner is with them - send Grigson packing, give Pagano a reprieve until the end of the season and see if the team can make a push after the bye week.

[Superman]

I agree, im not arguing about dorsetts ceiling... coaches don't rant and rave on a player like they did with duron..  My argument is how much grigs had a say so in not carrying the amount of WR's that the colts usually carry.

 

They usually carry five receivers. Six at times, but that's not normal.

 

And it's absolutely up to the GM to decide the makeup of the roster. Ideally, the GM and coach would be on the same page, but they won't agree on every single decision. If Grigson and Pagano disagreed on Carter and Dorsett for the final WR spot, it's Grigson's decision to make. However, I think it's very unlikely that they disagreed on Carter and Dorsett. Dorsett was never not going to make the final roster. And if there was an issue over Carter, it would have been him vs. Whalen or Brown, not Dorsett.

[Gavin]

I agree, im not arguing about dorsetts ceiling... coaches don't rant and rave on a player like they did with duron..  My argument is how much grigs had a say so in not carrying the amount of WR's that the colts usually carry.

Pagano has been known to rave about many players.....Even the obviously bad ones. Colts usually carry 5 wr's but Dorsett went down and Whalen has had his troubles as a Returner so they activated Bray whos been pretty solid

[Superman]

Just seems like the atmosphere in that building is so toxic.  The player's only meeting is the tell on this.  If they are left to themselves to try and block out the noise because the supposed adults can't behave themselves, then its on Irsay.  I'm looking at what the Ford Family has done in Detroit.  They are tired of the failure and blew it all up.  I think the players need to know the owner is with them - send Grigson packing, give Pagano a reprieve until the end of the season and see if the team can make a push after the bye week.

 

Getting rid of Grigson won't happen unless he's doing something Irsay doesn't want him to do.

 

And just as a note, for reference, the Colts had a players-only meeting last season, also. Difference is that guys went on the record about it. Don't know whether they'll acknowledge this one or not; we'll see.

[Mr. Irrelevant]

He made his statement addressing the noise earlier this year. No one believed him because everyone's mind was already made up. Nothing else he can do, from where I sit, except start firing people. 

 

Well, for starters, Irsay could make it clear that of course it is the HC that is making the final call on who starts. And trying to remove the drama of it all. Simple, clear stuff like that. That is what I would do.

[DougDew]

No he didn't. He said it's been like that for three years, he should be used to it

Right that's what he said, Andrew has faced pressure since he has been in the league (three years). He should be used to it.

So, lets think about this. Pagano wants to criticize the GM in the media, because the media reported there is a rift between him and Grigson. So he feels obligated to follow the media lead on this, right?

So, he criticizes Grigson in the media, by throwing his oline under the bus.

If what in the sports media OPINION of what he said was what he meant, then there is no way to separate the (supposed) criticism of Grigson from the criticism of the oline.

I think there is no way that Chuck Pagano would throw his oline under the bus at a press conference, especially as a backhanded way to get a dig into his boss.

Nope. No. No way. The MEDIA WAS WRONG (as usual) They, and they alone were thinking about the "rift" and CHOSE TO JUDGE any type of comment as playing a part in their story. And the WRONG OPINION got cut and pasted all over the internet multiple times.

[Jonathan24]

Pagano has been known to rave about many players.....Even the obviously bad ones. Colts usually carry 5 wr's but Dorsett went down and Whalen has had his troubles as a Returner so they activated Bray whos been pretty solid

 

 

Yes, I think for now Bray has earned his spot. Looks very explosive back there.

[jvan1973]

Right that's what he said, Andrew has faced pressure since he has been in the league (three years). He should be used to it.

So, lets think about this. Pagano wants to criticize the GM in the media, because the media reported there is a rift between him and Grigson. So he feels obligated to follow the media lead on this, right?

So, he criticizes Grigson in the media, by throwing his oline under the bus.

If what in the sports media OPINION of what he said was what he meant, then there is no way to separate the (supposed) criticism of Grigson from the criticism of the oline.

I think there is no way that Chuck Pagano would throw his oline under the bus at a press conference, especially as a backhanded way to get a dig into his boss.

Nope. No. No way. The MEDIA WAS WRONG (as usual) They, and they alone were thinking about the "rift" and CHOSE TO JUDGE any type of comment as playing a part in their story. And the WRONG OPINION got cut and pasted all over the internet multiple times.

You have no idea if their opinion is wrong or not. These reporters actualy interact with the staff and players. We dont. They have a much better feel for what's going on than we do. That is the only fact there is

[Steamboat_Shaun]

In numerous threads, there have been comments and reports about Grigson making decisions that are normally reserved for the HC. Most of us have not seen any specific evidence of this, but have read that via several outlets that "numerous NFL sources confirm this".

I wanted this to be its own thread because comments about this issue tend to get caught in the wash of other specific topical headings. So please reserve the thread for comments about this issue.

I've held several supervisory positions from time to time, and can tell you first hand that sometimes a supervisor has to get his or her hands dirty more than they want to when they lack confidence in their subordinates.

Is this the case with Grigson? Or, is he just a meddling task master that gets in the way of subordinates making good decisions?

I'd like to see more specific evidence on the matter.

What decisions did he make about lineup changes....were they the right ones or the wrong ones?

Why did he make them, to help win a specific game, or to see what a player can do against real competition?

Were they only on offense? Why?

IMO, this issue isn't going away anytime soon. Hopefully, if we can get a thread where we can post reports of specific decisions Grigson has supposedly been making, we can all have more clarity.

 

One question I have: did Grigson force Pagano to start Luck these last three games, when Pagano would've otherwise asked Luck to sit and get healthy? Knowing what we sort of know now, the alleged fractured ribs, etc, it doesn't seem that far-fetched to me that Pagano would rather have a healthy backup in the game than a banged up starter.

[Corndog]

Obviously no players are gonna go public, but I would like for Holder to actually say that HE HIMSELF has heard this from players. Because his article doesn't express that directly.

I was under the impression he spoke to them directly, especially with this quote.

 

"The players, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the situation inside Colts headquarters, outlined a number of concerns."

 

Also, just for you Superman, I tweeted him that question on the article.  I asked if he spoke directly to the players or it was a secondary source. 

[Superman]

I was under the impression he spoke to them directly, especially with this quote.

 

"The players, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the situation inside Colts headquarters, outlined a number of concerns."

 

Also, just for you Superman, I tweeted him that question on the article.  I asked if he spoke directly to the players or it was a secondary source. 

 

I get it. He doesn't say that specifically, though. Let me know if he gets back to you (I'm not holding my breath).

[Superman]

Well, for starters, Irsay could make it clear that of course it is the HC that is making the final call on who starts. And trying to remove the drama of it all. Simple, clear stuff like that. That is what I would do.

 

What if Pagano isn't making the final call on who starts all the time, and Irsay is fine with that?

 

We want it to be one way, but it might not be, and that might be at Irsay's direction.

 

Again, all IF.

[Corndog]

Yeah, I'm not counting on it either.  But if he does, I'll let you know.  

[Gavin]

What if Pagano isn't making the final call on who starts all the time, and Irsay is fine with that?

 

We want it to be one way, but it might not be, and that might be at Irsay's direction.

 

Again, all IF.

Personally I don't care about who is making the lineup calls as much as who is in the lineup. Don't get me wrong I generally believe a HC should have the final say in that decision...With that said for example if Grigson wants Thornton and Retz to start at RG/RT and Pagano wants Louis and Mewhort at RG/RT...Then Im obviously going with Grigson..That's just one example and that's only if Grigson has final say in lineup decisions

[jvan1973]

Personally I don't care about who is making the lineup calls as much as who is in the lineup. Don't get me wrong I generally believe a HC should have the final say in that decision...With that said for example if Grigson wants Thornton and Retz to start at RG/RT and Pagano wants Louis and Mewhort at RG/RT...Then Im obviously going with Grigson..That's just one example and that's only if Grigson has final say in lineup decisions

I would be more inclined to let the guy who has a 25 year career coaching players to decide who starts over a guy who has only a back ground in talent evaluation