Originally Posted by Lord Bills
it has. dallas has a great fanbase. a great stadium. a great franchise. they have superbowls. who was the owner when they won the superbowls?
jerry jones. Id rather have an involved owner than an owner who is totally oblivious and just lets people he blindly trust run rampant which is basically what happened during the kubiak era.
That's even an extreme example you are trying to use to win an argument. I never said McNair should be as involved as jerry jones to the point of being the actual GM.
Be involved, do your homework, listen, then if you feel like you have to over rule the GM or coach, you step in and do it.
That's the mark of a great owner. Similar to what Les Alexander is. Cuban and jones are too involved, robert kraft is a great example of an owner who is involved but too much that it hurts the team.
Guys like Al Davis and Jerry Jones were great for their respective franchises at the beginning. But then the game moved passed them and they had too much ego to bring in people smarter than they were to come in and make decisions.
There is nothing wrong with an owner who wants to be involved. But they have to understand where the line is. If you hire a guy to make decisions you can't step on his toes. There's a difference between blind trust and hiring people who you believe are up to the job and letting them make decisions. If they make bad decisions then you replace them.
I'm sure Kraft makes his opinions known. But do you think he overrules the people that he has hired to make those calls if they disagree?