Jump to content

Ian Cunningham


DABEARSDABOMB
 Share

Recommended Posts

Seems like he'll get a new gig. Will be curious to see who Bears replace him with. He was a tremendous hire and will be a big loss (albeit the draft pick compensation for losing him will be nice too). 

Latest is he is down to the final 2 with Washington.  I haven't heard whether he is in the running with Carolina, New England, San Diego, or Oakland.  Or am I mistaken and Oakland has a GM?  Are there any other teams I'm leaving out?  Certainly seems unlikely with that many GM jobs, that the Bears won't lose him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

My money is on a minority.

I hope that is not the only or primary criteria. I would rather hire the best up and coming guy for the job regardless of demographics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, adam said:

I hope that is not the only or primary criteria. I would rather hire the best up and coming guy for the job regardless of demographics.

If course the guy will qualified but, If it's a competitive advantage, of course they will take it.  Showing our diversity is also a competitive advantage, with bringing in talent.  If rich men could be trusted to do the right thing, we wouldn't need have the Rooney rule or the 3rd round exec benefit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

If course the guy will qualified but, If it's a competitive advantage, of course they will take it.  Showing our diversity is also a competitive advantage, with bringing in talent.  If rich men could be trusted to do the right thing, we wouldn't need have the Rooney rule or the 3rd round exec benefit.  

I agree with everything you've both said until that last line. Owners can be trusted to be greedy and work in self interest.

People can certainly be ignorant, and maybe their race filter makes them wrongly not see minority talent in front of them, but there is no way any NFL team would pick a less qualified white guy because hes white. These guys would sell their own mothers for an extra win a year.

The Rooney rule is great because it puts candidates in front of decision makers, and that helps ease the first problem I mentioned above. If youre unconsciously blind to something for example, that really helps.

But this new rule where you get 2 x 3rd round picks for hiring a minority assistant GM who is then hired away seems wrong to me. In my view it's not necessary, again, because these guys want the best talent, and wont consciously let race get in their way to having the best people. What it does instead, is incentivize hiring someone who may be less qualified in order to get those picks. If two candidates are equally qualified it gives an edge to the minority hire - not even sure I love that. Seems illegal. A Rooney rule for GM and assistant GM hiring would be preferable in my view.

Of course, I'm all for minority people in the NFL. That seems almost a silly thing to say out loud since so many players are not white, and former players make up a good part of the pool from which future leadership positions are drawn. This isn't 1940s basketball for example.

Let me also say that the NFL was not always color blind. No one can say that in the 70s or beyond that there wasn't a stigma around black QBs for example. That was a real shame too. It was stupid. And racist. But we got past it just by our culture evolving and the hyper competitive nature of winning in the NFL. And we didnt have to give free draft picks to teams to do it either. Pure greed for wins overcomes everything else, as it should be.

But as long as there are free draft picks available, I expect teams to want them. Given multiple candidates that are all equally qualified, I hope the Bears use this rule and get more picks. But I think the rule isn't helping as much as intended. It will make people wonder whether the guy that got hired really was the best for the job, or if they got hired for the picks - and I think that does more damage to the NFL group-think about the value of minority GMs than it helps.

What will really help things continue to change are Super Bowl winning GMs of all colors. And rule or no rule, that is going to happen either way.

I should also add that by all accounts Ian Cunningham did an exceptional job for us, and is being considered for GM positions because he was not simply qualified, but one of the best (if not the best) assistant GM in the league. To the point where I have wondered to myself whether if Poles retains Eberflus AND FIelds, and fumbles the coordinator jobs, that I might not consider calling for Poles to be fired, and replaced by Cunningham!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

People can certainly be ignorant, and maybe their race filter makes them wrongly not see minority talent in front of them, but there is no way any NFL team would pick a less qualified white guy because hes white. These guys would sell their own mothers for an extra win a year.

You certainly have more faith in the billionaire boys club than I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

You certainly have more faith in the billionaire boys club than I do.

I don't have faith in their morality - I have faith that they want to win and make money at any cost. That they are greedy and self interested.

To call it faith as if i think they are good and interested in moral decisions is very different from what I said in my post. It's a semantic trick on the word "faith in"

I totally agree with you that I dont have faith in them to choose right over profit. My point was the total opposite of that?

I think there are levels to this.

Level 1 is overt conscious racism i.e. explicit racism. That would mean an owner or GM knew that a minority candidate was better but refused to hire them because they are black or asian or whatever. That makes no sense to me, but if I am naive and such creatures do exist in the NFL, I cant believe theyd hire the guy for the extra 3rd rounders, if they are that hateful.

Level 2, is more likely, that would be unconscious bias where the decision maker doesnt realize they are racist, but are seeing people wrongly because of implicit bias. that's implicit racism. In that case i still dont think 2 3rd rounders would make the difference - who is gonna hire someone they (wrongly) think is less able for a couple 3rd rounders? This is why Id favor a Rooney rule for GMs and assistant GMs instead, it puts qualified minority candidates in meetings with decision makers so their ability and personal energy can win the room.

Level 3 is where the decision maker has no bias, and chooses a minority candidate who is equally qualified as other candidates just to get the picks. That's no racism. And if the rule exists, this is what I hope the Bears will do. But what it means is that you didnt overcome a racist (explicit or implicit) decision maker, you just increased minority representation. i think this is illegal, although Im sure no politician or prosecutor wants to touch that issue. But the white guy thats getting passed over, he isn't benefitting because some other white guy has a job? And you havent changed anything because this decision maker in this scenario isnt level 1 or 2 anyway?

At any rate, I have no doubt that minority representation in GMs will increase with or without these rules, because there are a lot of well connected, football experienced minority people in the pipeline who will get jobs on merit alone. All it really does is perhaps cheapen their personal accomplishment by adding the question of whether they personally would have still gotten the job if they were white? Im saying lots would still get the job, and didnt need the rule.

But like I said, a Rooney rule for GMs and assistant GMs would be welcome. Nothing at all wrong with that in my eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

Peters, Niners Asst GM, is getting the Washington job.  

If Cunningham stays another year, maybe thats good, so he can help with QB decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

Something to consider and personally I’d be ok with it.  

IMG_6401.jpeg

yeah this is what I was saying above. By all accounts he is very valuable for us, and of all years we need all the analytical help we can get going into the draft, this one has to be tops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pixote said:

I hope that while interviewing for the Washington GM they blew it and let slip their draft interests and their thoughts on filling their need at QB. LOL

 

thats not as far fetched as it may seem. They almost certainly discussed the draft, and while I doubt they said "heres what were gonna do" Im sure the questions they asked tipped their hands a bit. Good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

thats not as far fetched as it may seem. They almost certainly discussed the draft, and while I doubt they said "heres what were gonna do" Im sure the questions they asked tipped their hands a bit. Good point.

The inverse is - did Cunningham release any intel on the Bears thought(s). Could go both ways.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian literally had the Arizona GM job last year and turned it down. If not this year , he will next year. Both him and Poles came from excellent front offices. Ian absolutely contributed to everything Po!es has did so far. Maybe even agreed on bringing Flus back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

The inverse is - did Cunningham release any intel on the Bears thought(s). Could go both ways.  

for sure. there's so much smoke though, and our analysis hasnt been completed yet, so Cunningham may like a player we dont eventually choose at #1, or not like a guy who we eventually do take at #1. And Washington would still be nervous we might take the guy they want, so that they could be in the trading mix with us to jump up and get him. And that scenario only matters if no one else is interested in #1 and we are trading out of it. If anyone else wants #1 for any player, Washington has to fear that too. And if we dont trade out we take whoever we want to. We are the 800 pound gorilla in the room this year. :)

So it's not much of a risk. On the other hand, knowing who Washington likes might help us feel comfortable to trade down with them first to #2, but of course they havent completed their analysis yet either. and on and on the wheel spins!

Its all spy stuff now, and everything and its opposite could be true lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

for sure. there's so much smoke though, and our analysis hasnt been completed yet, so Cunningham may like a player we dont eventually choose at #1, or not like a guy who we eventually do take at #1. And Washington would still be nervous we might take the guy they want, so that they could be in the trading mix with us to jump up and get him. And that scenario only matters if no one else is interested in #1 and we are trading out of it. If anyone else wants #1 for any player, Washington has to fear that too. And if we dont trade out we take whoever we want to. We are the 800 pound gorilla in the room this year. :)

So it's not much of a risk. On the other hand, knowing who Washington likes might help us feel comfortable to trade down with them first to #2, but of course they havent completed their analysis yet either. and on and on the wheel spins!

Its all spy stuff now, and everything and its opposite could be true lol

Washington didn't take him. He's now on to the Chargers for an interview.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ChileBear said:

Washington didn't take him. He's now on to the Chargers for an interview.

right the question is in interviews did he gain any insight to Washington's views on the top QBs, and did he spill any of our info to them.

I dont think its a big deal at all, but we have nothing else to talk about so we're dissecting that LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

right the question is in interviews did he gain any insight to Washington's views on the top QBs, and did he spill any of our info to them.

I dont think its a big deal at all, but we have nothing else to talk about so we're dissecting that LOL

Got it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

next up - does Matt Eberflus talk in his sleep and is his next door neighbor a Packer's fan lol

He probably mumbles something about we've turned it around, we won the last game, now we're 1 and 4. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian interviewed with Chargers over the weekend.  Harbaugh just interviewed for the coaching job and it "went well".  Who knows where that lands. 

My question is would Cunningham want to be a GM in a place where he didn't get to hire the HC?  Especially a HC like Harbaugh who is going to want some control over the roster, if not full control.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, AZ54 said:

Ian interviewed with Chargers over the weekend.  Harbaugh just interviewed for the coaching job and it "went well".  Who knows where that lands. 

My question is would Cunningham want to be a GM in a place where he didn't get to hire the HC?  Especially a HC like Harbaugh who is going to want some control over the roster, if not full control.  

I want to believe Cunningham would pass on going to the Chargers if that meant Harbaugh was hired, esp if he had no say. That is unless Ian is so sure that Harbaugh will succeed and he’d help his own cause by getting a few really good years on his resume.

But stories in NFL circles suggest Harbaugh wears on players after about 3-4 years. Something about him running things too much like college.  Then Ian would have his biggest challenge and have to fire the guy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...