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

[Corndog]

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

You might not care, but I could see why the players would have a problem with it.  If Holden's article is true, then the players might not be in lineup and wonder what they need to improve.  Obviously Pagano's door is open for players, is Grigson's?  The real issue would be if Grigson is in control of line ups, but doesn't want to communicate directly with the players.  That would cause a bad situation with the players.  Not saying it's the case, no one really knows except for the Colts themselves.  Just saying a situation where that could cause problems in the locker room.  

[DougDew]

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.

I offered an alternative possibility to these rumors on the first page. Pagano is a defensive minded coach, and as HC, has to spend time overseeing everything. Grigson is an ex o lineman, and has apparently stayed out of the D's lineup.

I'll wager a fair amount that Grigson has spent more time watching the olinemen at practice than Pagano has. He may, in fact, be in a better position than Pagano to make the lineup choices.

Especially since it is his job to see how some of them can perform heading into the season. Its Pagano's job to merely win games now. Grigson's job is more important.

[jvan1973]

I offered an alternative possibility to these rumors on the first page. Pagano is a defensive minded coach, and as HC, has to spend time overseeing everything. Grigson is an ex o lineman, and has apparently stayed out of the D's lineup.

I'll wager a fair amount that Grigson has spent more time watching the olinemen at practice than Pagano has. He may, in fact, be in a better position than Pagano to make the lineup choices.

Especially since it is his job to see how some of them can perform heading into the season. Its Pagano's job to merely win games now. Grigson's job is more important.

That's why you have an offensive coordinator and an o line coach.

And how is the gms job more important than the head coach? History only remembers quarterbacks and head coaches. The head coach in football is the most important job in the organization.

[Gavin]

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

Its really not that simple unfortunately, Like I mentioned above. If Pagano wanted to start Louis and Grigson wanted to start Thornton then I don't care how many years Pagano has coached because that would be the wrong decision, Its ultimately about the decisions and not about who is making them. To me its a case by case basis

[jaybird95]

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. 

 

I appreciate how I'm getting hounded on by other posters for not jumping to conclusions. Everybody rags on the media and their "reports" until it supports them.

[jvan1973]

Its really not that simple unfortunately, Like I mentioned above. If Pagano wanted to start Louis and Grigson wanted to start Thornton then I don't care how many years Pagano has coached because that would be the wrong decision, Its ultimately about the decisions and not about who is making them. To me its a case by case basis

I have no doubt Pagano and the staff would put the best players on the field. Your hypothetical really doesn't make sense

Grigson signed louis. What if Pagano never wanted him on the team to begin with

[Gavin]

You might not care, but I could see why the players would have a problem with it.  If Holden's article is true, then the players might not be in lineup and wonder what they need to improve.  Obviously Pagano's door is open for players, is Grigson's?  The real issue would be if Grigson is in control of line ups, but doesn't want to communicate directly with the players.  That would cause a bad situation with the players.  Not saying it's the case, no one really knows except for the Colts themselves.  Just saying a situation where that could cause problems in the locker room.  

I believe Grigson talks to the players. He had discussions with Shipley when he was starting and benched. Grigson was on the Dan Dakich show when he brought that up

[DougDew]

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

I agree. I don't. I just watched Pagano's comments after the Jets game with my own eyes and came away with the impression that he was talking about Andrew being able to make better decisions in the face of what has been common for him the past three years. And others saw it as Pagano criticizing Grigson's assembly of the oline.

I guess that's because at the time, I thought Luck was missing checkdowns and was trying to heave the ball down field instead of taking the easy first down, so my prism was focused on Luck. The media didn't yet question Luck, and saw the comments through the mass focus on the oline and the rift that was set out by Kravitz.

The media has access to much more bandwidth than I do, so I guess most people saw it the way the media did at the time and didn't bother looking at Luck.

[DougDew]

I believe Grigson talks to the players. He had discussions with Shipley when he was starting and benched. Grigson was on the Dan Dakich show when he brought that up

Hmm. Sounds like there may be an honest agreement between Irsay, Pagano, and Grigson that Grigson influences oline decisions.

So the rumor that Grigson makes decisions that typically are reserved for the HC may be true, but of course, it may not even remotely be a problem within the Colts organization.

Except that some players may not be aware of that structure.

[Gavin]

I have no doubt Pagano and the staff would put the best players on the field. Your hypothetical really doesn't make sense

Grigson signed louis

Good point about the Louis signing, I missed that fact but at the end of day its about the decision and not who is making that decision to. If Chuck is wrong then so be it. If Grigson is wrong then so be it. Im not willing to go as far as say Pagano and staff would put the best players on the field but Im not saying they would not of course, Im just wondering like everyone else who has made some of these decisions...Such as starting Lance Louis

[jvan1973]

Good point about the Louis signing, I missed that fact but at the end of day its about the decision and not who is making that decision to. If Chuck is wrong then so be it. If Grigson is wrong then so be it. Im not willing to go as far as say Pagano and staff would put the best players on the field but Im not saying they would not of course, Im just wondering like everyone else who has made some of these decisions...Such as starting Lance Louis

The gms job is to bring in players that fit the coaches scheme.

It's the coaches job to coach them, game plan, and put the team in position to win games.

[DougDew]

That's why you have an offensive coordinator and an o line coach.

And how is the gms job more important than the head coach? History only remembers quarterbacks and head coaches. The head coach in football is the most important job in the organization.

If Lance Louis turns out to be good after coming back from injury, he won't have to spend a second round draft pick on a G next spring, or can spend the $5 million he would have to sign one on re-signing DA.

I think a smart HC would want as many good players over the life of his contract as he could, so he wouldn't object to seeing LL be tried at G.

Again, I don't believe the rift thing, or that Grigson made decisions AT THE OBJECTION (that's key) of Pagano.

[jvan1973]

Because if Lance Louis turns out to be good after coming back from injury, he won't have to spend a second round draft pick on a G next spring, or can spend the $5 million he would have to sign one instead of re-signing DA.

I think a smart HC would want as many good players over the life of his contract as he could, so he wouldn't object to seeing LL be tried at G.

Unless, of course, he whines about it because his contract expires this year and he doesn't care about the coming offseason.

At what point was lance louis good before he got here

[Gavin]

The gms job is to bring in players that fit the coaches scheme.

It's the coaches job to coach them, game plan, and put the team in position to win games.

Of course but if the HC is reluctant to bench a bad player and the GM is right then the GM gets my vote on that particular decision, Again I generally agree with you but its not always that black and white

[jvan1973]

Of course but if the HC is reluctant to bench a bad player and the GM is right then the GM gets my vote on that particular decision, Again I generally agree with you but its not always that black and white

If a coach is playing bad players over better players, then you need a new coach.

[DougDew]

At what point was lance louis good before he got here

So now we're going to debate Grigson's evaluation of talent over yours.

Isn't that really what this whole belief in the "rift" is ultimately about...with every critic?

That there is a rift, and its Grigson's fault.

[Superman]

I appreciate how I'm getting hounded on by other posters for not jumping to conclusions. Everybody rags on the media and their "reports" until it supports them.

 

Not sure what you mean. I'm not hounding you, and I'm not jumping to conclusions. You said there was no evidence, and I think this report qualifies as evidence. There's a big difference between evidence and proof.

 

And you might note that I've been mostly dismissive of these 'reports,' up until now.

[Corndog]

Superman, he responded to my tweet he said "both".

 

@Stroufed83 Both

— Stephen Holder (@HolderStephen)

November 6, 2015

[DougDew]

Superman, he responded to my tweet he said "both".

 

@Stroufed83 Both

— Stephen Holder (@HolderStephen)

November 6, 2015

Spoke to them about what? What are the players saying, that Grigson makes lineup decisions? Is that what Holder reported?

[jvan1973]

So now we're going to debate Grigson's evaluation of talent over yours.

Isn't that really what this whole belief in the "rift" is ultimately about...with every critic?

That there is a rift, and its Grigson's fault.

Not at all. I get taking chances on low level, diamond in the rough guys. Grigson has done a good job at that. But he shouldn't be telling Pagano who should start on gamefay.

[DougDew]

Not at all. I get taking chances on low level, diamond in the rough guys. Grigson has done a good job at that. But he shouldn't be telling Pagano who should start on gamefay.

Unless Pagano and Irsay agree that he can.

So is Pagano or Irsay upset that he does?

or did the players say that he does...don't like it, and Holder is thinking that Grigson shouldn't have that authority because some of the players don't like it?

So the problem would be that Grigson should stop because some of the players don't like it.

I'm still not following.

[Corndog]

Spoke to them about what? What are the players saying, that Grigson makes lineup decisions? Is that what Holder reported?

Are you serious? Read the article he wrote and yes Grigson making lineup decisions is part of it.   

 

Here it is;

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2015/11/05/indianapolis-colts-team-meeting-chuck-pagano/75248720/

[jvan1973]

Unless Pagano and Irsay agree that he can.

So is Pagano or Irsay upset that he does?

or did the players say that he does...don't like it, and Holder is presenting that as a problem?

Why would a HC want the gm making gameday decisions on personell?

But ihave a strong feeling the answers to these questions will be answered at seasons end.

[ThaCaliColt]

Perhaps it could have been earlier this season when the O-line was shuffled.  I believe our starting O-line combo was Castanzo-Louis-Holmes-Herremans-Mewhort... Not a very good combination.

 

Granted the O-line changes haven't solved all the problems but it seems that the current line up is a lot better than the original.

 

Just speculation on my part of course but that is one possibility where Grigson may have dictated the starting lineup which clearly wasn't the most talented 5.

Louis...Herremans...Vomit...

[Jason_]

Its really not that simple unfortunately, Like I mentioned above. If Pagano wanted to start Louis and Grigson wanted to start Thornton then I don't care how many years Pagano has coached because that would be the wrong decision, Its ultimately about the decisions and not about who is making them. To me its a case by case basis

 

But, Grigson and Pagano can't call you every time a tough decision needs to be made to see which one of them is right.

[DougDew]

Why would a HC want the gm making gameday decisions on personell?

But ihave a strong feeling the answers to these questions will be answered at seasons end.

 

 

Are you serious? Read the article he wrote and yes Grigson making lineup decisions is part of it.   

 

Here it is;

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2015/11/05/indianapolis-colts-team-meeting-chuck-pagano/75248720/

Guys, because I'm not criticizing doesn't mean I'm defending. I'm just trying to get at the root of the what this "problem" is.

So we are certain that Pagano wanted Mewhort at LG, but Grigson said no, Louis should start and JM needs to go to RT.

Is that what Holder said the players told him?...or were the players not specific

IIRC, Louis actually graded out as the best Olineman during the preseason...and...Thornton was injured and couldn't play RG...

..but despite LL grading positivley, and HT being hurt, we know that Pags didn't want LL or Herremans to start because Holder reports that "Grigs makes decisions typically reserved for the HC"

What decisions did he make over Pags? Would any HC bench the Olineman who graded out highly in the preseason and want to start an injured player over a recently signed vet? Seems to me that Pags had good reason to start LL and AH.

No I don't follow the message that Holder is conveying. It actually makes no sense given what he says in his article and the facts of what has happened this season.

[JPFolks]

Perhaps it could have been earlier this season when the O-line was shuffled.  I believe our starting O-line combo was Castanzo-Louis-Holmes-Herremans-Mewhort... Not a very good combination.

 

Granted the O-line changes haven't solved all the problems but it seems that the current line up is a lot better than the original.

 

Just speculation on my part of course but that is one possibility where Grigson may have dictated the starting lineup which clearly wasn't the most talented 5.

Who is to say that original lineup wasn't Grigson's idea?  After all, why would he have signed Herremans if he didn't want him to start? I would think Grigs forced him in the lineup before thinking he forced him OUT of the lineup.  Either way, it demonstrates a failure on Grigson's part.  

[Corndog]

 

 

Guys, because I'm not criticizing doesn't mean I'm defending. I'm just trying to get at the root of the what this "problem" is.

So we are certain that Pagano wanted Mewhort at LG, but Grigson said no, Louis should start and JM needs to go to RT.

Is that what Holder said the players told him?...or were the players not specific

IIRC, Louis actually graded out as the best Olineman during the preseason...and...Thornton was injured and couldn't play RG...

..but despite LL grading positivley, and HT being hurt, we know that Pags didn't want LL or Herremans to start because Holder reports that "Grigs makes decisions typically reserved for the HC"

What decisions did he make over Pags? Would any HC bench the Olineman who graded out highly in the preseason and want to start an injured player over a recently signed vet? Seems to me that Pags had good reason to start LL and AH.

No I don't follow the message that Holder is conveying. It actually makes no sense given what he says in his article and the facts of what has happened this season.

The players aren't concerned about what specific decision was made, that is YOUR concern, not their own.  Here I will make it even easier quoting the article on Grigson choosing line ups.

 

"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.

Chief among them: coach Chuck Pagano and his staff are being directed to follow lineup decisions — usually the coaches' prerogative — made by the front office, something numerous NFL sources confirmed. This has been a recurring source of irritation for Pagano and his coaches.During the past several weeks, and even dating to last season, there have been instances in which, sources said, players approached Pagano or his assistants with suggestions or requests, only to be told they could not act on the ideas because of forces beyond their control."

 

So the players are upset they cannot approach Pagano or the other coaches on starting and what not, because Grigson makes the calls at times.  Whether or not he is not making the right calls are not the point.  It is a concern amongst the players and therefore it probably effects the team. 

[DougDew]

1

[DougDew]

The players aren't concerned about what specific decision was made, that is YOUR concern, not their own.  Here I will make it even easier quoting the article on Grigson choosing line ups.

 

"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.

Chief among them: coach Chuck Pagano and his staff are being directed to follow lineup decisions — usually the coaches' prerogative — made by the front office, something numerous NFL sources confirmed. This has been a recurring source of irritation for Pagano and his coaches.During the past several weeks, and even dating to last season, there have been instances in which, sources said, players approached Pagano or his assistants with suggestions or requests, only to be told they could not act on the ideas because of forces beyond their control."

So the players are upset they cannot approach Pagano or the other coaches on starting and what not, because Grigson makes the calls at times.  Whether or not he is not making the right calls are not the point.  It is a concern amongst the players and therefore it probably effects the team.

Yes. I read that over and over again, on the myriad of cut-and-paste sites that refer to that passage as the basis of the criticism on Grigs. That one piece, yeah, read it.

So Chuck tells them they are not starting or their suggestions are not being taken because "the other guy made me do it". Are we sure Chuck just isn't being spineless?

That "resource" doesn't tell me why Chuck would want to bench LL after his positive grades this preseason and not start Todd over HT when HT was injured and that Grigson made out that lineup.

[Superman]

Superman, he responded to my tweet he said "both".

 

@Stroufed83 Both

— Stephen Holder (@HolderStephen)

November 6, 2015

 

That's a hedge, IMO. 

 

I'm still not fully convinced of anything, but I guess there's really no way to know for sure.

[Mameluc]

No, that's a conjecture.

? how is that a conjecture? Players had a meeting about this. They confirmed this to a reporter.

not sure what you mean

[Mameluc]

wth does this mean?

 

are you trying to say circumstantial?

Im sorry dude Im mexican. English is not my native language so Im gonna make mistakes like that one

 

 

often.

 

 

Try spelling in spanish.

[Mameluc]

Honestly im tired of this

 

Irsay make up your mind already regarding Grigson pagando etc and make the drama stop. 

 

The franchise needs order.

[jvan1973]

Honestly im tired of this

Irsay make up your mind already regarding Grigson pagando etc and make the drama stop.

The franchise needs order.

There really is no benefit to doing that now.

[JPFolks]

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.

Based on the premise of the question (i.e. does it matter since he is in charge) then let's simply hold him to blame for this season and not the coaches.  His head should roll first if they fail.  

[DougDew]

Based on the premise of the question (i.e. does it matter since he is in charge) then let's simply hold him to blame for this season and not the coaches.  His head should roll first if they fail.

It sounds like you want to fire him anyway, and might be looking around for "news" reports to validate that opinion. I don't think you're alone.

[jvan1973]

It sounds like you want to fire him anyway, and might be looking around for "news" reports to validate that opinion. I don't think you're alone.

JMV has been reporting on the disconnect between grigs and pags as well. He has pretty deep contacts in the organization and other local contacts.

[Gavin]

There really is no benefit to doing that now.

If Irsay feels Pagano is the guy for the job then there is. If Irsay signs him to a multi year deal then the whole talk of whether or not he thinks Pagano is the guy for the job goes away and shifts to why does he think he is the guy now for the job. But bottom line is everyone would know exactly where Irsay stood on the matter of whether he thought Pagano was the long-term answer, Then the talk would die down shortly after that and everyone could get back to football (Media wise)...I think both Irsay and Grigson have doubts

[Corndog]

 

Chief among them: coach Chuck Pagano and his staff are being directed to follow lineup decisions — usually the coaches' prerogative — made by the front office, something numerous NFL sources confirmed. This has been a recurring source of irritation for Pagano and his coaches.During the past several weeks, and even dating to last season, there have been instances in which, sources said, players approached Pagano or his assistants with suggestions or requests, only to be told they could not act on the ideas because of forces beyond their control."

 

So the players are upset they cannot approach Pagano or the other coaches on starting and what not, because Grigson makes the calls at times.  Whether or not he is not making the right calls are not the point.  It is a concern amongst the players and therefore it probably effects the team.

Yes. I read that over and over again, on the myriad of cut-and-paste sites that refer to that passage as the basis of the criticism on Grigs. That one piece, yeah, read it.

So Chuck tells them they are not starting or their suggestions are not being taken because "the other guy made me do it". Are we sure Chuck just isn't being spineless?

That "resource" doesn't tell me why Chuck would want to bench LL after his positive grades this preseason and not start Todd over HT when HT was injured and that Grigson made out that lineup.

 

So your okay with accusing Pagano of being spineless, but not okay with the reports on Grigson despite being reported by multiple sources.  Gotcha, clearly you have a horse in this race and it isn't Pagano.  Not that it wasn't very apparent, but you have clearly outed yourself.