McKenzie next on the GM search list

Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by aj., May 21, 2006.

  1. aj.

    aj. Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,769
    Likes Received:
    347
    I ran across the article below which provides more support for my weak GM theory. I was looking to add it to the McKenzie thread which I expected to see somewhere- but I couldn't find anything on it. In the immortal words of Vince Lombardi, "what the hell is going on around here?" You guys are slipping.

    On a side note, who still faxes?

    GB Post Gazette offering (with insight - or at least opinion):
    http://greenbaypressgazette.packersnews.com/archives/news/pack_26107704.shtml
    Chronic hit (wire copy Ctrl C - Ctrl V):
    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/3877641.html
     
  2. Hardcore Texan

    Hardcore Texan Magnet Man

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    9,464
    Likes Received:
    844
    Location:
    Round Rock, TX
    I don't know much about either of these guys, mostly what I just read, but both candidates come from a long tradition of winning. That has to be a good thing. Sounds like Smith from Denver has the inside track.
     
  3. aj.

    aj. Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,769
    Likes Received:
    347
    I like Smith better than McKenzie or Ron Hill.
     
  4. TwinSisters

    TwinSisters Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    In my mind.
    I hope they just ride this season out with Sherman as acting GM and then make a move. ( hopefully go without one )

    There is nothing that says you have to have a GM and it is rare that a rookie Head Coach is going to have any credit in the bank to be able to stand next to a GM that is over him. It just seems like adding to much to the pot right now ... and will potentially brew up some unwanted trouble.

    I think Kubiak is bound to hit some bumps and it's better not to have a guy like Casserly around to make for trouble in the FO. I remember seeing a lot of BS coming out of the papers last year that resulted in a bunch of finger pointing that didn't seem all that productive ( although we did get a #1 pick overall out of it... but that crap is like getting a Blue participation ribbon, nice but who really wants that? ).

    Casserly is gone. Delegate whatever the hell he was doing to some assistants and let Kubiak ride solo until he has some wins underneath his belt.

    That's what I hope they do.
     
  5. ArlingtonTexan

    ArlingtonTexan Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,159
    Likes Received:
    465
    Interesting concept, but everyone I have ever talked about Sherman in Green Bay feels like the Sherman the GM was horrible. They are little more mixed on his coaching ability.
     
  6. TexanFan881

    TexanFan881 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    59
    Location:
    Illinois
    Seems like we're getting people that know the coaches on our team. First we had Rick Smith come in (Kubiak) and now McKenzie (Sherman). :hmmm:
     
  7. mexican_texan

    mexican_texan Furry Tractors

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    14,192
    Likes Received:
    515
    Location:
    Spring, TX
    Wasn't Smith a puppet for Shanahan?
     
  8. ensign_lee

    ensign_lee Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Having lived in Wisconsin for a year, that was what a LOT of packers fans thought. Case in point: that punter that they drafted in the third that they then waived.
     


  9. aj.

    aj. Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,769
    Likes Received:
    347
    Smith and Ted Sundquist are responsible for player personnel with titles of Asst GM and GM. They report to Shanahan. I've read some good things about Smith.

    I expect Smith's role here would be the same as Casserly's was this year. Run the scouting operations, grade and rank talent at the pro and college level, develop the draft board, interface with other teams on free agency, and be the spokesperson for football ops. Ferens would be at an equal position and be responsible for cap and negotiations. Kubiak would probably have 51% of the vote on most draft day decisions other than high #1 picks where the owner might also be involved.
     
  10. mapleleaf

    mapleleaf Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Pearland, TX
  11. aj.

    aj. Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,769
    Likes Received:
    347
    That's completely bogus. Read the part about citation needed.
     
  12. TwinSisters

    TwinSisters Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,470
    Likes Received:
    40
    Location:
    In my mind.
    Yeah absolutely. You have to remember though that Sherman is filling in right after Holmgren and the Super Bowl Packers ( nothing less then a Super Bowl would make folks happy ). I wouldn't want Sherman as the GM either, but he can hold the fort down until Kubiak gets some legitimate credit to his name.

    I guess I am saying I actually believe Kubiak is going to do well without having the extra distractions. Meaning the risk of having some type of FO power struggle outweighs just letting Sherman do the deeds under Kubiak, until Kubiak can devote the extra energy to the critical GM duties ( player management ).

    harmony in the Front Office means something and I don't want to see the Capers/Casserly thing again in <insert GM>/Kubiak. It can get really messy.

    See Holmgren Seattle:
    http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=58067
     
  13. Bobo

    Bobo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,375
    Likes Received:
    21
    Just because you have two different perspectives doesn't make it a bad thing at all. If you know anything at all about business, one guy who makes all the decisions without someone to give him honest, adversarial input is a recipe for disaster. Especially when the guy is as green as Kubiak.
     
  14. aj.

    aj. Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,769
    Likes Received:
    347
  15. OzzO

    OzzO .. and then?

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    7,193
    Likes Received:
    298
    Location:
    northside
    McKenzie is the man? I thought Smith was the man? I don't know much about either, but I see either one of them before Hill (Falcons - correct?) Smith and McKenzie seem to have a good past and have had good Texan feedback from their visits.
     
  16. TexanFan881

    TexanFan881 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,807
    Likes Received:
    59
    Location:
    Illinois
    Of course he's going to say Mario was the right pick for the Texans. He does want to be the GM of the Texans doesn't he?
     
  17. nunusguy

    nunusguy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,991
    Likes Received:
    244
    Location:
    Houston
    I dunno....but could McKenzie relate better to the players, which is important
    when it comes to recruiting FAs to the Texans ?
    Smith struct me as someone who was awfully busy trying to impress you with
    his vocab, which might leave potential prospects considering signing a contract with the Texans uncomfortable and feeling as if they were being talked down to.
     
  18. GP

    GP Go Texans!

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    17,747
    Likes Received:
    1,573
    Location:
    TEXAS!
    Here's the link to a thread that already has McKenzie in it--The thread title even has McKenzie's name in it, too.

    http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=23564

    I would have started a McKenzie thread, but every time I do something like that...it gets merged with another thread that's already there. I scanned the threads (last night at about 10 pm) and saw that someone had already brought up news about McKenzie...thus, I added my espn.com link about him to the already existing thread. I followed the rules, but had I not...I'm sure my thread would have been merged with the already existing thread that I am linking you all to.

    One of my minor (please note I said "minor") gripes about thread merging, at least for me, is that I (and others) often come up with newer and more pertinent information that will help people to not have to wade through sometimes hundreds of posts just to find the newest skinny on the topic. To me, there comes a time when a newer thread needs to be allowed so that board members don't have to wade through tons of posts that have become very irrelevant due to a major shift in the developments of a story (i.e. Moulds trade confusion, which had everyone playing "who's on first?" for about 125 posts).

    Allowing a new thread that has the title "Moulds trade officially NOT completed yet" and having it in conjnction with the older thread helps people to see that someone has discovered more relevant and timely information on the topic. In addition, in that sort of situation, the OLDER thread should be merged into the newer thread (in my opinion) and not the other way around. I know we want to reward people for getting the scoop and starting the thread...but to me, I think most board members would appreciate thread merging that's more in line with us getting the news faster, easier. While I like scanning posts along the way to the most recent posts about the topic, there's a lot of "news" items that I just want to get right to the heart of and find out the most up-to-date information on.

    Been wanting to discuss this for awhile now (as you can see :)) and I think the timing is good for it. Thanks for al you guys do, we appreciate your work and dedication. I'm not making a huge gripe, just a suggestion.
     
  19. edo783

    edo783 Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    7,712
    Likes Received:
    308
    Location:
    Houston, again.
    IMO, we have two winners in either Smith or McKenzie to choose from. Not a bad thing.
     
  20. Ibar_Harry

    Ibar_Harry Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,219
    Likes Received:
    71
    I agree with you. I thought there was too much I in his speach and his personality ruffled my feathers. I know its a 1st impression, but 1st impression is often important in an interview. He really came off as a non-team player for some reason. I didn't feel he would blend in with what we already have.

    For example, despite what people thought Casserly and Kubiak sat down, rolled up their sleeves, and they developed into a complimentary relationship. Each brought something different to the table. I don't get that with Smith. Seems like he emphasizes that he and Kubiak are two peas in a pod. I think a different perspective is important in this situation. I don't want a yes man.
     

Share This Page