Reality Check

[40yearfan]

While you're going on and on with your personal attacks on me, would you like to step back a moment and apologize for being totally wrong about a change in GM automatically meaning an entire rebuild for the team? I'd really appreciate it.

Not being able to hold two oppositions in one's mind and seeing that they both can be valid isn't a character flaw. It's a sign of a high-functioning intelligence. Of course, it doesn't seem like you'd know anything about that. Keep toeing the party line, my friend. It only makes you look more foolish with each passing 5-11 season. But I guess you'll still have all those April headlines to assuage yourself with.

For me, I'd rather have a December front page header reading "CARDS CLINCH PLAYOFFS!" than another July headline on Page C6 elaborating on "HOLDOUT ENTERS SECOND WEEK."

If you want to read personal attacks, read any of your posts responding to mine. You start something and then complain when it's dumped back into your lap. Like I said in my last post, you take both sides of an issue to make sure you have your bases covered. Regardless of what you say, it is a character flaw. You can't stand by your convictions if you don't have any and a person without convictions is not intelligent, only wishy washy.

 

[joeshmo]

Probably RG's biggest mistake was in not vetoing some of DG's moves.

That is my biggest real problem with Graves. I suspect that other items I disagree with Graves comes from powers that are over his head.

 

[AZCB34]

My point is simple Russ.

RG haters here bring this up over and over again. Like the Cardinals were so stupid as to let Q fall to the 2nd round [like thge rest of the nfl]. Then the only reason we got him is that the Tolbert got down on his knees and begged them to take him.

The obvious point here that the people who say this are trying to make is that all the bad decisions we made in that draft are his fault and none of the good ones.

It sounds to me like whoever was running that draft listened to the Tolbert as he had some additional information. So if it was RG then he did listened to those around him and made a good call [sign of a good manager]. If it wasn't RG then then GET OFF HIS BACK about the other calls i that draft.

Either he made some good, some bad + 1 amazing call in that draft or somebody else did. Don't cherry pick the items you like as not him and assigned the bad ones to him. BE CONSISTENT

I think he should be assigned applause or criticism for every pick in that draft as I believe he was the final word. He took info from those around him and formulated a decision that ended up being the final one.

I don't think anyone said Tolbert "got on his knees and begged" but Tolbert could very well have been so adamant about this that it could have easily been he was begging for the Cards to take him without going through the dramatics you seem to think people are suggesting. One can beg without being on one's knees.

 

[Derm]

You can't stand by your convictions if you don't have any and a person without convictions is not intelligent, only wishy washy.

5/5
:golfclap:

 

[BACH]

One question...

If Graves wasn't respondsible for the Boldin pick, who exactly did Tolbert had beg to?

Graves' job is to make the choice based on the advise from scouts and coaches. Well, wasn't that exactly what happened with Boldin?

Twist and turn this thing as much as you like. Graves pulled the trigger on Boldin, 31 other GMs/VPs didn't.

 

[Russ Smith]

One question...

If Graves wasn't respondsible for the Boldin pick, who exactly did Tolbert had beg to?

Graves' job is to make the choice based on the advise from scouts and coaches. Well, wasn't that exactly what happened with Boldin?

Twist and turn this thing as much as you like. Graves pulled the trigger on Boldin, 31 other GMs/VPs didn't.

How do we know Anquan didn't draft himself?

Afterall he is Anquan Boldin, and he's a grown ass man.

 

[Duckjake]

Man it's been a long time since we heard this bit of baseless spectulation.

I think the stad response is, every heard of business loans ?

They were not baseless but came from someone who knew the Bidwills well enough to introduce me to them and had a direct business relationship with the team. Many people felt the same way you did that the source was wrong. Yet year after year guys would hold out and suddenly come to terms with the team at about the time the TV money was paid.

Getting loans to cover cash short falls has been discussed many times in connection with cash flow requirements to pay signing bonuses. The thought is that a conservative businessman like Bill Bidwill would not likely do that.

If you so adamantly believe the story to be false lets hear your evidence to disprove it. Do you also have any facts to show that the Bidwills took out business loans or could have taken out loans to pay signing bonuses?

 

[Stout]

Well done Stout. Once again, without a shred of evidence and no source to quote, you drag out the tired old line that some unnamed scout had to beg Graves to draft Bolden.

Find a credible source for once in your life and put it here. Otherwise, have some class for a change and quit quoting internet rumor as fact. My guess is you'll fail at both. You have a long track record of baseless accusations.

You don't like Rod. We get it. Over and over and over ad infinitum. You are free to continue to bash. I just figured it was time someone told you it gets boring and beating it to death doesn't make you right.

I'm through letting you and Stout and a few others spew your vitriol unchallenged. That's my fault for letting it happen. And no, I'm not trying to chase you away. You are Cards fans. It's just from now on, when someone rips the Cards using crappy unverifiable sources, it won't go unchallenged.

Welcome to 2007. We are all in this together and we all hope it gets better. By the way, I will ban myself for two weeks after the super bowl for repeatedly insulting posters.

Dude, all I can say is wow. I don't like Graves; that's clear. You like him, but some people feel that's because you know him personally. You've half admitted as much. I didn't say this was a fact about Boldin (although others later backed me up). I was only telling the guy why people felt Graves wasn't responsible. Wow, Skkorp, you don't need to be so harsh, bro. I go strong on certain opinions and argue. Sometimes I get out of hand, yeah, but I certainly haven't lately. I just have a strong stance and will debate it. I think you came too harsh at me. Chiiiiill, Winstoooon.

 

[blindseyed]

If you want to read personal attacks, read any of your posts responding to mine. You start something and then complain when it's dumped back into your lap. Like I said in my last post, you take both sides of an issue to make sure you have your bases covered. Regardless of what you say, it is a character flaw. You can't stand by your convictions if you don't have any and a person without convictions is not intelligent, only wishy washy.

Where has K9 been on both sides of this?
I think his position is very clear....

 

[conraddobler]

There were several write ups about when Boldin was drafted, one scout we had noticed the guy for some reason had a connection and knew all about him and he went postal on us drafting him that's common knowledge it always has been.

I don't think it was Steve but it may have been, I don't remember which one it was of if it was some assistant but that story was in the papers and everywhere else.

Let's not debate silly things like that, I'm so tired of this tripe that I'm going nukelear on this issue, let's let the man show through his production just how good he is.

We'll see.

He's outfront now, he's in charge, he's the man, the horse is in his barn, he's head get players and field them guy so batter up and let's see how this goes, I'm patient, heck I'm a Cardinal fan, I know the ending, just gonna eat popcorn while it unfolds.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Well done Stout. Once again, without a shred of evidence and no source to quote, you drag out the tired old line that some unnamed scout had to beg Graves to draft Bolden.

Find a credible source for once in your life and put it here. Otherwise, have some class for a change and quit quoting internet rumor as fact. My guess is you'll fail at both. You have a long track record of baseless accusations.

And cbus, you choose to ignore half of what I write. I have clearly stated way back in this thread that IMO Rod Graves is responsible for many of the good things that have happened in the Cards organization for the last few years. I cannot prove them. But it is not just that I think Rod Graves is just a nice guy. I think he is competent in his job and have often stated so.

But you, and about six others choose to belittle me by misrepresenting my statements and those of anyone else who disagrees with you about Graves. I just like Graves because "he's a nice guy." Way to go to suggest I'm dumb and shallow. Thanks cbus, how does it feel to go through life being so intellectually superior to anyone else?

You don't like Rod. We get it. Over and over and over ad infinitum. You are free to continue to bash. I just figured it was time someone told you it gets boring and beating it to death doesn't make you right.

I'm through letting you and Stout and a few others spew your vitriol unchallenged. That's my fault for letting it happen. And no, I'm not trying to chase you away. You are Cards fans. It's just from now on, when someone rips the Cards using crappy unverifiable sources, it won't go unchallenged.

Welcome to 2007. We are all in this together and we all hope it gets better. By the way, I will ban myself for two weeks after the super bowl for repeatedly insulting posters.

I believe i stated some of the reasons for my dislike of Graves. You stated that you like Graves, that he is a good man and still answers your e-mails. What, as a GM/VP, has he done that you thought was good and your reasons for thinking he deserves a 3 year extension? My conclusion came about from what you had stated, it wasn't belittling. You and Nidan keep telling us to come up with facts to back up our claims. I look at his track record and see that it is very bad. Can you guys give us some proof that those decisions and moves weren't Graves's and back up why you think he's done a good job . I know Nidan hinted around back then that the trade down wasn't Graves doing but never gave us the "real" story.Then the story came out recently that Graves passed on him for PR, signability reasons which is a completely laughable move by a front office/VP/GM. Yet, he then wants to credit him for the Boldin, Hayes picks. Just like us, you can't have it both ways. He was either in charge or he wasn't.Like Russ, nobody seems to know. We have the only team in the NFL where noone knows who's calling the shots. I don't begrudge you guys for liking Graves but you shouldn't come down on us for disliking him either. I don't think anything i've ever stated about Graves has been "made up" or factually incorrect.

 

[Duckjake]

Let's not debate silly things like that, I'm so tired of this tripe that I'm going nukelear on this issue, let's let the man show through his production just how good he is.

I agree. Let's judge him by the product he puts on the field.

 

[Paso Fino]

They tried. Drafted 2 centers, two guards, and signed 2 FA guards. And finally it started coming together but too late.

The notion they did nothing is false.

I did not say they did nothing. I said they did not ADEQUATELY deal with the OL situation for 3 years. Maybe its all right with you for them to take two and one-half years to get it right, but thats not good enough for me. And I am not sure that they still have it right.

 

[40yearfan]

Where has K9 been on both sides of this?
I think his position is very clear....

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1206282&postcount=112

In the above post he says he isn't in favor of a complete makeover and then goes on to say we should only keep 7 players and replace the rest of the team. If that ain't a contradiction, I don't know what is.

 

[Sandan]

I agree. Let's judge him by the product he puts on the field.

Lets also not judge him by the product on the field when he wasn't the VP/GM, some folks here are dragging this conversation back to pre McGinnis days.

Just because he was on the staff does not mean he was the GM, in fact he wasn't. However the rhetoric and RG hating is looking for any excuse to rip on him

Likewise, a GM is SUPPOSED to take the long term view, without that he can't evaluate the performance of a HC. RG has had one cycle and I think we all agree the talent level on the team is much better.

Lets see what happens on the field for the next round

 

[kerouac9]

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1206282&postcount=112

In the above post he says he isn't in favor of a complete makeover and then goes on to say we should only keep 7 players and replace the rest of the team. If that ain't a contradiction, I don't know what is.

I did not say that we "should" only keep 7 players and replace the rest of the team. I said that if a new GM came in and decided to do that, it might not be the worst idea in the world, since his roster has only won 16 games in the last three seasons.

But you can go ahead and misrepresent what I said if you feel it keeps you from arguing the facts of the matter, which are obvious.

1. All of the first-round draft picks since Rod Graves became VP of Football Operations have failed to have contracts before the beginning of camp (Antrel Rolle, two weeks. Matt Leinart, until August 15. Larry Fitzgerald, first day of camp. Calvin Pace, 3 1/2 days of camp. Bryant Johnson, 5 days of camp.)
2. The Arizona Cardinals have had a worse record than any team in the league except one (Detriot Lions) under Rod Graves' stewardship.
3. Rod Graves lacks a plan for this franchise to start winning football games currently and has lacked faith in the ability that the roster he built can compete in the past.
4. Rod Graves has stated that wins and losses are not his primary metric of success in measuring his own performance.
5. Rod Graves allowed his subordinate (Denny Green) to make decisions that he felt were not in the best interest of the franchise.
6. Rod Graves was instrumental in bringing the last failed head coach in, which lead to three consecutive double-digit losing seasons.
7. Rod Graves was the person ultimately responsible for the ridiculous trade down fiasco in the 2003 draft, which was for reasons that primarily had nothing to do with football and mostly to do with public relations.

These are the facts, and they are indisputable. But go ahead and accuse me of being wishy-washy, or taking two positions at once, or whatever, if you feel that it can distract the board from these facts.

Or you can take the nidan and Skkorp approach and remind us of how nice a guy Rod Graves is. That seems to be working, too.

 

[kerouac9]

Lets also not judge him by the product on the field when he wasn't the VP/GM, some folks here are dragging this conversation back to pre McGinnis days.

Just because he was on the staff does not mean he was the GM, in fact he wasn't. However the rhetoric and RG hating is looking for any excuse to rip on him

Likewise, a GM is SUPPOSED to take the long term view, without that he can't evaluate the performance of a HC. RG has had one cycle and I think we all agree the talent level on the team is much better.

Lets see what happens on the field for the next round

So we can't judge him by the product he's put on the field the last four seasons, where the Cards went 4-12, 6-10, 5-11, 5-11. I'd think that you'd like it better if we did look at the product on the field from before he become VOFO, since--you know--the Cards had a better average record before he took control of football operations.

But that's just me.

 

[Wild Card]

1. All of the first-round draft picks since Rod Graves became VP of Football Operations have failed to have contracts before the beginning of camp (Antrel Rolle, two weeks. Matt Leinart, until August 15. Larry Fitzgerald, first day of camp. Calvin Pace, 3 1/2 days of camp. Bryant Johnson, 5 days of camp.)
2. The Arizona Cardinals have had a worse record than any team in the league except one (Detriot Lions) under Rod Graves' stewardship.
3. Rod Graves lacks a plan for this franchise to start winning football games currently and has lacked faith in the ability that the roster he built can compete in the past.
4. Rod Graves has stated that wins and losses are not his primary metric of success in measuring his own performance.
5. Rod Graves allowed his subordinate (Denny Green) to make decisions that he felt were not in the best interest of the franchise.
6. Rod Graves was instrumental in bringing the last failed head coach in, which lead to three consecutive double-digit losing seasons.
7. Rod Graves was the person ultimately responsible for the ridiculous trade down fiasco in the 2003 draft, which was for reasons that primarily had nothing to do with football and mostly to do with public relations.

These are the facts, and they are indisputable.

K9:

I don't dispute the above list--and will be interested to see if anyone else does--since these mostly sound like the facts as I remember them. And I admire your careful linking to the late reporting of our first-rounders, which makes me think you have entirely too much time on your hands.

But I'm uncertain of your citation for the first part of #3, i.e., "Rod Graves lacks a plan for this franchise to start winning football games." I thought that Graves had made repeated references to his plan, most recently as quoted in the East Valley Tribune 1/02/07: "'We feel like we have a good plan,' general manager Rod Graves said."

Whether it's "good" or not is subject to debate, but Graves seems to think he's got a plan. Are we talking multiple plans here?

WC

 

[Sandan]

K9 I notice how you pick part of my post to attack while ignoring tha other part.

Yes we should judge him by the product on the field but you have to give a GM a longer time frame than a HC. Particualry as the talent level on the team has noticably improved, they just aren't being used well.

 

[40yearfan]

I did not say that we "should" only keep 7 players and replace the rest of the team. I said that if a new GM came in and decided to do that, it might not be the worst idea in the world, since his roster has only won 16 games in the last three seasons.

But you can go ahead and misrepresent what I said* if you feel it keeps you from arguing the facts of the matter, which are obvious.

1. All of the first-round draft picks since Rod Graves became VP of Football Operations have failed to have contracts before the beginning of camp (Antrel Rolle, two weeks. Matt Leinart, until August 15. Larry Fitzgerald, first day of camp. Calvin Pace, 3 1/2 days of camp. Bryant Johnson, 5 days of camp.)
2. The Arizona Cardinals have had a worse record than any team in the league except one (Detriot Lions) under Rod Graves' stewardship.
3. Rod Graves lacks a plan for this franchise to start winning football games currently and has lacked faith in the ability that the roster he built can compete in the past.

Pure speculation on your part and based on your opinion only. I'm sure RG doesn't feel this way.

4. Rod Graves has stated that wins and losses are not his primary metric of success in measuring his own performance.

And they aren't. He's a GM in charge of football operations and personnel. The W's and L's have to be the primary concern of the coaches, players and owners.

5. Rod Graves allowed his subordinate (Denny Green) to make decisions that he felt were not in the best interest of the franchise.

And if he would have had his thumb on DG and not let him make his own moves, you would have been screaming to high heaven about how the Bidwill's crimp the coaches style and keep him from winning.

6. Rod Graves was instrumental in bringing the last failed head coach in, which lead to three consecutive double-digit losing seasons.

Yes he was, but a whole lot of people thought he made the right move. RG isn't precognizant like yourself.

7. Rod Graves was the person ultimately responsible for the ridiculous trade down fiasco in the 2003 draft, which was for reasons that primarily had nothing to do with football and mostly to do with public relations.

Give it a rest. One mistake and he's marred for life. Hopefully people will be more forgiving with you than you seem to be with others.

These are the facts, and they are indisputable. But go ahead and accuse me of being wishy-washy, or taking two positions at once, or whatever, if you feel that it can distract the board from these facts.

The distraction is the loud noises you make trying to protect your position. The people on this board are intelligent enough that they don't need me to interpret the facts for them. My disagreeing with your opinion is between you and I.

Or you can take the nidan and Skkorp approach and remind us of how nice a guy Rod Graves is. That seems to be working, too.

I'm sure you read Skkorp's reply about this very subject. I have more faith in his intelligence level than you seem to have. Same thing for nidan. He and I don't agree on much, but I still respect his opinion.

*K9, how can you say this. Read your post.

 

[kerouac9]

But I'm uncertain of your citation for the first part of #3, i.e., "Rod Graves lacks a plan for this franchise to start winning football games." I thought that Graves had made repeated references to his plan, most recently as quoted in the East Valley Tribune 1/02/07: "'We feel like we have a good plan,' general manager Rod Graves said."

Whether it's "good" or not is subject to debate, but Graves seems to think he's got a plan. Are we talking multiple plans here?

I think that there are probably two plans. One is the one that Rod Graves has admittedly done a good job at: maintaining plenty of room under the salary cap, slowly building the talent level through the draft, not making stupid free agency decisions (though I think the Cards took a step back with that last one last offseason with Edge's signing, but I don't think we can put that on Rod Graves).

But what concerned me was that Rod seems to look to the HC for the plan for personnel and on how to build a team. It seems to me like the best front-office execs in the league (Jerry Angelo, A.J. Smith, Rich McKay, the guy in Seattle, Scott Pioli, the Ravens' VPFO etc.) seem to have the ability to look at a roster and see the holes that are there and then find ways to keep the guys that are actually good around while finding the correct fits for that team. I don't think that Rod Graves has shown the ability to look at his roster skeptically in comparison to the rest of the league nor to find the right pieces to put in with the rest of the roster to be successful. That's one of the reasons that I think the roster looked so dystfunctional for so long. Individually, the pieces looked good, but they didn't fit together correctly.

Didn't Rod also say in his press conferences that he's looking for a HC with a plan to win? That's my biggest problem. I feel like Rod Graves has a financial plan, but I don't think that he has a plan for how this team wins more than 6 games per season. If he looks to the next HC to establish that plan and not have his own views on the matter, we're going to be looking at another 3 years of Denny Green-like roster mismanagement because there's not another authoritative voice and point of view with a long-term plan.

As many on this thread have said, it's the GM's job to take the long view on the roster and management. I'm not sure that Rod Graves has a long-term personnel philosophy. If he does, he hasn't shown it.

 

[40yearfan]

I think that there are probably two plans. One is the one that Rod Graves has admittedly done a good job at: maintaining plenty of room under the salary cap, slowly building the talent level through the draft, not making stupid free agency decisions (though I think the Cards took a step back with that last one last offseason with Edge's signing, but I don't think we can put that on Rod Graves).

But what concerned me was that Rod seems to look to the HC for the plan for personnel and on how to build a team. It seems to me like the best front-office execs in the league (Jerry Angelo, A.J. Smith, Rich McKay, the guy in Seattle, Scott Pioli, the Ravens' VPFO etc.) seem to have the ability to look at a roster and see the holes that are there and then find ways to keep the guys that are actually good around while finding the correct fits for that team. I don't think that Rod Graves has shown the ability to look at his roster skeptically in comparison to the rest of the league nor to find the right pieces to put in with the rest of the roster to be successful. That's one of the reasons that I think the roster looked so dystfunctional for so long. Individually, the pieces looked good, but they didn't fit together correctly.

Didn't Rod also say in his press conferences that he's looking for a HC with a plan to win? That's my biggest problem. I feel like Rod Graves has a financial plan, but I don't think that he has a plan for how this team wins more than 6 games per season. If he looks to the next HC to establish that plan and not have his own views on the matter, we're going to be looking at another 3 years of Denny Green-like roster mismanagement because there's not another authoritative voice and point of view with a long-term plan.

As many on this thread have said, it's the GM's job to take the long view on the roster and management. I'm not sure that Rod Graves has a long-term personnel philosophy. If he does, he hasn't shown it.

Great post K9. When you aren't posting with anger as your only motive, you are much more lucid.

 

[joeshmo]

Yes we should judge him by the product on the field but you have to give a GM a longer time frame than a HC. Particualry as the talent level on the team has noticably improved, they just aren't being used well.

I dont think that is true at all, but thats your opinion. So just so I understand this idea of yours a little better.

How long should a GM be given to turn a team around? And what is your reasoning for that time period?

Now I wont talk about not liking the extension anymore as that is in the past. So lets talk about what we expect from him(this team) in the future.

Should he be given the full 3 years more of his contract extension making it 7 years to get this thing up and running again? Should he be given 2 years giving his new coach at least 1 year to install his program? Or should he be given 1 more year(this next season) letting a new coach and staff that he hired coach this talent to the next level?

I say its the last of the 3 options. Because he either didnt hire the right coaching staff for a 2nd straight time (and yes with this supposed talent a 1st year coach should be able to do it) or the talent level really isnt as good as we thought it was in the first place. In both cases it doesnt look well on Graves. This is all with the assumption that a succesfull season is nothing less then a 9-7 season the first year.

 

[Duckjake]

Lets also not judge him by the product on the field when he wasn't the VP/GM, some folks here are dragging this conversation back to pre McGinnis days.

Graves was promoted to oversee the scouting department in 1998 so he should take some heat for those teams as well. Not as much as if he'd been VP of football operations though because I doubt it was his idea to leave Tobin hanging and have problems with key players in '99.

Graves was the one who said to judge "them" by the product they put on the field. That product has been terrible. So I'm judging "them" as terrible.

That being said, the current problems with the team go back to the Cardinals poor decision to leave Tobin as a lame duck coach going into 2000 and then replacing him with McGinnis. I believe, and it is just my opinion, that if they had extended Vince after the 1998 season he would still be the HC and the Cards would have had far more than 35 wins this century.

 

[Wild Card]

It seems to me like the best front-office execs in the league (Jerry Angelo, A.J. Smith, Rich McKay, the guy in Seattle, Scott Pioli, the Ravens' VPFO etc.) seem to have the ability to look at a roster and see the holes that are there and then find ways to keep the guys that are actually good around while finding the correct fits for that team.

K9:

That's a pretty good list. And for the completists among us, the "guy in Seattle" is President of Football Ops/GM Tim Ruskell (who was previously the assistant GM in Atlanta with McKay) and the Ravens department of player personnel is run by GM/EVP Ozzie Newsome, who's followed a brilliant on-field career with almost equally impressive results in the front office.

And until/unless the Cardinals put someone in charge of personnel who deserves to be mentioned in the same breath with the guys you've listed, I'm afraid we're gonna see more of the same in the management of this team's roster.

WC