View Single Post
  #3  
Old 12-02-2016, 05:43 PM
Raider Disliker Raider Disliker is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,914
Default

There is so much in the original post that it is difficult to reply to. So I guess I've got to take some selected points, and leave it at that.

One: Alex Spanos, versus his heirs. No doubt, Alex Spanos built a real estate / apartment house empire by his own efforts. His children have in effect inherited, as I believe Alexander Spanos is still alive, but of advanced age.

His heirs obviously haven't developed the management skill or moxie that it takes to run a far-flung real estate empire. There's an East Coast real estate guy who has done a better job of getting his kids ready to run things -- think he's got a hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C.

Two: The relocation saga. The master stands in the shoes of his agent. Fabiani alienated a lot of people in the pursuit of L.A. The pursuit of L.A., and only the pursuit of L.A., is now the inevitable result. That was probably intended by ownership, but if not, that is the result that they get, nonetheless.

Three: The Front Office versus the Coaches. Clearly you need a competent front office to run the business, and ideally the Coaches should be allowed to concentrate on football matters. The unfortunate intersection between Front Office and coaches has to do with the talent -- drafting, and paying. Paying rookies to come aboard, and paying veteran talent to stay. I think ownership has more or less abdicated management duties to the front office, when an involved owner should be acting more or less as a referee or umpire between the conflicting interests of front office, coaches, and players.

Four: this is all sort of an academic discussion, because there is no likelihood of a change in ownership in the near future. That is all.
Reply With Quote