John Jones , is taking a leave.

[packinpatland]

Anyone know anything more about this?
********************
Jones To Take Personal Leave, Bob Harlan To Remain As Packers' Principal Executive


posted 05/26/2007

John Jones, president and COO of the Packers, has taken a leave of absence for personal reasons. Peter Platten, speaking on behalf of the organization's Executive Committee, made the announcement Saturday.

"We determined that it would be mutually beneficial for John to take a leave of absence while we continue our evaluation of the situation and collectively determine next steps," said Platten. "John will be on leave until the Executive Committee and John conclude that process."

"It's been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects," said Jones. "I need to step back and recharge my batteries. I will take this leave of absence. The Executive Committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interests of the Green Bay Packers to take this step."

Bob Harlan will continue to serve as the principal executive of the Green Bay Packers for a period of time to be determined, as Chairman of the Board, Platten also announced.

"Everyone knows what a great leader Bob has been for this organization over the past 18 years," said Platten. "We are pleased that Bob has agreed to provide leadership continuity for the organization. The Executive Committee has tremendous confidence in Bob and his capable staff."

[MJZiggy]

Wow. :shock: I mean I'm glad Harlan is staying, but that is really wild.

(When I saw the headline, I thought you meant James Jones...)

[packinpatland]

Isn't this worded oddly?


"The Executive Committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interests of the Green Bay Packers to take this step."

[BallHawk]

I thought the same as Zig, I thought it was James Jones.

[packinpatland]

I thought the same as Zig, I thought it was James Jones.

Better? :oops:

[BallHawk]

I thought the same as Zig, I thought it was James Jones.

Better? :oops:

Get rid of the unnecessary space mark between Jones and the comma and then we're good.

:wink:

[gbpackfan]

Wow! This is very interesting. Something is very, very wrong. Harlan was suppose to step down next week!

I love Harlan and am happy to see him stay but WOW!

Reporters all over the state are going to tear into this story like a monkey on a cupcake.

[MJZiggy]

...like a monkey on a cupcake.

:lol: :lol:

[Bretsky]

...like a monkey on a cupcake.

:lol: :lol:


Didn't he have some health concerns a while back ? That is theory #1.

Maybe he doesn't get along with your idol ? :wink:

[MJZiggy]

:roll:

[Bretsky]

:roll: :laugh: :roll:

[GBRulz]

Yeah, he had open heart surgery not even a year ago. While I understand every situation is different, I am assuming he has some ongoing heath / heart problems. My Dad has had two bypass surgeries and has always bounced back pretty quickly, but like I said, everyone is different, which leads me to the theory that it is health issues. While I don't know alot about Jones, to lead this organization is a huge task and perhaps he doesn't want to chance his health by doing it. My gut tells me Harlan is going to stay on board until they find another President...which won't be Jones.

[Joemailman]

Executive Committee: 'A decision we knew we had to make'

Press-Gazette

Packers Executive Committee member Peter Platten III's opening statement at today's press conference regarding the status of team president and chief operating officer John Jones, who won't take over as the team's chairman and chief executive officer on Wednesday as long planned.

Management concerns involving John Jones became apparent to the Executive Committee. As a group, we have spent a significant amount of time evaluating the situation and gathering the appropriate information. The issues have been discussed in detail with John. Ultimately, it was mutually decided it would be beneficial for John to take a leave of absence while the Executive Committee continues our evaluation and considers the next steps.

John will be on leave until the process is concluded. Out of respect to John, we are unable to discuss the specific concerns that led to the decision. But I will tell you that they did not involve personal conduct or ethical violations. This was an incredibly difficult decision for the Executive Committee, especially knowing how hard John has worked on behalf of the Packers, but it was a decision we knew we had to make.

John Jones has accomplished a lot in the eight years of service, especially related to the redevelopment of Lambeau Field and the establishment of the new atrium businesses. Once this decision was reached, we decided the best course of action for the short term would be to approach Bob Harlan about staying on as the chairman of the board.

He will act as the organization’s principal executive officer. Bob agreed to temporarily forego retirement so that the organization would maintain leadership continuity until the issue of our long-term leadership is determined. We would expect to have this matter fully resolved within one year.


This doesn't sound like a health issue to me. Sounds like either something is really wrong with how he handles the job, or they have discovered personal information not known when he was promoted.

[BallHawk]

What could be so bad they wouldn't want to tell?

[Rastak]

I feel bad for the guy....sounds like the team made a decision and basically told him this is how it is. I'm sure they had good reasons and I'm not faulting the team. Just a bummer for the guy, that's all.

[packinpatland]

Doesn't sound like 'health issues'.

[Bretsky]

What could be so bad they wouldn't want to tell?


I was listening to projections on WTMJ; thought is it's health related.

No clue if true or not

But maybe GB had concerns about his health and stress of job
and just decided they wanted to go another route ???

[GrnBay007]

This doesn't sound like a health issue to me. Sounds like either something is really wrong with how he handles the job, or they have discovered personal information not known when he was promoted.

I got the opposite from the article. Things point to health problems (recent heart problems) and many times people just don't want their health problems made public (more than what's already out there) for many reasons.



But I will tell you that they did not involve personal conduct or ethical violations.

[packinpatland]

"The Executive Committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interests of the Green Bay Packers to take this step."


Guess until they decide to fill everyone in, we should just assume the move that was made was for everyone's best interest, not just the GB Packers.

[Joemailman]

007,

I understand where you're coming from. However, the vagueness of the statement seems strange. If Jones needs time off for health reasons, they could say that without going into details. This kind of statement leaves them, and Jones open to a lot of speculation. The fact that they said it was not due to personal conduct does not eliminate the possibility that it was due toprofessional conduct.

[mraynrand]

My gut tells me Harlan is going to stay on board until they find another President...which won't be Jones.

Ron Wolf?

[packinpatland]

007,

I understand where you're coming from. However, the vagueness of the statement seems strange. If Jones needs time off for health reasons, they could say that without going into details. This kind of statement leaves them, and Jones open to a lot of speculation. The fact that they said it was not due to personal conduct does not eliminate the possibility that it was due toprofessional conduct.

Oh God, what did he and TT do?

[GrnBay007]

007,

I understand where you're coming from. However, the vagueness of the statement seems strange. If Jones needs time off for health reasons, they could say that without going into details. This kind of statement leaves them, and Jones open to a lot of speculation. The fact that they said it was not due to personal conduct does not eliminate the possibility that it was due toprofessional conduct.

Could be. But, after 8 years of service I would think they had plenty of history to judge from in that area. Plus, it's a last minute call...still sound like health to me....could be wrong though.

[Kiwon]

Management concerns involving John Jones became apparent to the Executive Committee. As a group, we have spent a significant amount of time evaluating the situation and gathering the appropriate information. The issues have been discussed in detail with John. Ultimately, it was mutually decided it would be beneficial for John to take a leave of absence while the Executive Committee continues our evaluation and considers the next steps.

John will be on leave until the process is concluded. Out of respect to John, we are unable to discuss the specific concerns that led to the decision. But I will tell you that they did not involve personal conduct or ethical violations. This was an incredibly difficult decision for the Executive Committee, especially knowing how hard John has worked on behalf of the Packers, but it was a decision we knew we had to make.


The lack of specificity is surprising. They eliminated "personal conduct" and "ethical violations" but left other possibilities in play. My impression is that it is the EC making a preemptive move more than a mutual decision.

To me, the wording makes it sound both temporary ("until the process is concluded") and final ("it was a decision we knew we had to make"). Is "we" here EC and JJ or just the EC alone?

If it is a health related then why not say so? Everyone understands that. Mental health issues, family problems or the such might warrant more discretion.

The facts will come out soon enough but the timing and the tone of the statement leads one to believe that the well-planned transition from BH to JJ is in great doubt.

Of course, we wish the best for everyone in the organization and no doubt this is the right move although the reasons why aren't clear now.

[Kiwon]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.

[GrnBay007]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.

No Way!! Miss Scarlet in the library with a gun. :P

[Kiwon]

Using a Lady Derringer, of course.

[Rastak]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.


I have the Billiard room.

[packinpatland]

The Packers need better PR people.

[Rastak]

Profootballtalk.com's take:


JONES OUT AS PACKERS' NEXT CEO

On the eve of long-time Packers president Bob Harlan's passing of the baton to John Jones, whom Harlan picked to succeed him in 1999, Jones took a leave of absence -- leaving Harlan in the job indefinitely.

"We determined that it would be mutually beneficial for John to take a leave of absence while we continue our evaluation of the situation and collectively determine next steps," said Peter Platten, on behalf of the team's Executive Committee. "John will be on leave until the Executive Committee and John conclude that process."

According to the Associated Press, the leave is being attributed, vaguely, to "management concerns."

Platten could not provide specifics, but said that the move "did not involve personal conduct or ethical problems."

"It's been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects," Jones said in a statement issued by the team. "I need to step back and recharge my batteries."

Jones had open-heart surgery last year, and it's possible that he simply hasn't returned to the level of health that will allow him to properly and effectively do the job. Publicly held via shares of stock, the Packers are the only NFL team without a specific owner. The CEO is the closest thing, and the CEO needs to be in a position to fulfill all aspects of the job.

Our guess is that Jones quietly will fade into the background, and that the team will hire a new president after the 2007 season.

[Kiwon]

Profootballtalk.com's take:

Our guess is that Jones quietly will fade into the background, and that the team will hire a new president after the 2007 season.

Matt Millen? :mrgreen: (No stones, please....only pebbles)

[packinpatland]

Profootballtalk.com's take:

Our guess is that Jones quietly will fade into the background, and that the team will hire a new president after the 2007 season.

Matt Millen? :mrgreen: (No stones, please....only pebbles)

You deserve an avalanche!!! :lol:

[packinpatland]

Why the intrigue for heaven's sake?

Jones seems unlikely to stay with Packers

By Rob Demovsky
rdemovsk@greenbaypressgazette.com

The makeup of the Green Bay Packers’ front office changed abruptly on Saturday, four days before John Jones was to replace Bob Harlan as the team’s chairman and chief executive officer.


The team announced Jones is taking a leave of absence for personal reasons, then cited “management concerns” involving Jones, who was selected more than a year ago to replace the retiring Harlan.

Though no team officials would say exactly what those concerns were, it appears unlikely that Jones ever will run the Packers.

Harlan has agreed to remain in charge until the team’s executive committee decides what course to take.

Three weeks ago, Harlan went to the committee with concerns about Jones.

Executive committee member Peter Platten said “management issues” came to light several months ago.

“I felt I owed it to the organization,” Harlan said. “I report to the executive committee, and it was my obligation to keep the executive committee informed about anything that I thought was going on in the organization, which I do all the time, and this was an issue I thought we needed to look at.”

Asked whether it was one specific incident involving Jones, Harlan said: “I think ‘management issues’ describes it well. It’s not (a) management issue. It got to the point where I felt I needed to go to the executive committee. It was done at this time because I felt I needed to report to that committee before I left the position.”

Jones, a former journalist who worked for the Jacksonville Jaguars during their early days as an expansion team and had two stints in the NFL’s front office, was hired by the Packers on Feb. 10, 1999, as senior vice president of administration. He was promoted to executive vice president and chief operating officer on Oct. 16, 2001.

On Oct. 12, 2005, the Packers’ board of directors, at Harlan’s suggestion, approved a succession plan that would make Jones the team’s president in May 2006 and the team’s CEO upon Harlan’s retirement in May 2007.

“I thought I had it very well planned, and something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred,” Harlan said. “And now we have to deal with it.”

Jones, 55, did not attend Saturday’s news conference. He had emergency heart surgery on June 11, 2006, and didn’t return to work full-time for several months.

“It’s been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects,” Jones said in a statement released by the team. “I need to step back and recharge my batteries. I will take this leave of absence. The executive committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interests of the Green Bay Packers to take this step.”

Though Jones never would discuss the surgery or the nature of his medical problem, his limited work schedule hampered the Packers’ plan to slowly make him the face of the organization by increasing his public appearances during the 2006 season.

Platten wouldn’t answer questions regarding Jones’ health, but medical concerns were not believed to be an issue in the move. Platten also said it had nothing to do with “personal conduct or ethical violations.”

Following the widely popular Harlan was going to be a difficult task regardless, but Jones never seemed to gain the full support of those who worked under him. In recent months, several team employees expressed concerns about Jones to at least one executive committee member.

Instead of meeting on Wednesday to officially hand control of the team to Jones, the Packers’ board of directors will convene to decide what to do next. Platten said it could take up to a year to resolve the situation.

“This has been a very intense process over a relatively short period of time,” Platten said. “We achieved the result we hoped we would, and John has also. What we do now is go from this point and evaluate the situation and go forward as we feel appropriate.”

Harlan was forced to retire this year because the team’s bylaws call for mandatory retirement at age 70. Harlan turned 70 last Sept. 9, but the bylaws allowed him to remain in charge until the board meeting the following spring. Harlan was to continue with the team as chairman emeritus and already had begun moving his belongings into a new, smaller office at Lambeau Field.

“As the executive committee knows, I would do anything for this organization,” Harlan said. “I didn’t think for an extra second when they asked me if I could come back and do this. I’m honored to do it.”

In searching for a new chairman and CEO, the Packers will consider candidates from inside the organization and from other NFL teams.

The most likely internal candidate is Andrew Brandt, 46, the team’s vice president of player finance/general counsel. He has been with the Packers since 1999 and is their chief contract negotiator and salary-cap manager.

Vice president of finance Vicki Vannieuwenhoven and vice president of administration Jason Wied were recently promoted and could receive interviews.

Former Packers executive Mike Reinfeldt, who was hired in February to be the Tennessee Titans executive vice president and general manager, also could be a candidate, though it may be difficult to lure him away from his new job.

Had he not left the Packers in 1998 to follow Mike Holmgren to the Seattle Seahawks, Reinfeldt was on track to be Harlan’s eventual replacement.

Other NFL candidates likely would need to have experience working for a small-market team.

[Farley Face]

Why the intrigue for heaven's sake?

Jones seems unlikely to stay with Packers

By Rob Demovsky
rdemovsk@greenbaypressgazette.com

The makeup of the Green Bay Packers’ front office changed abruptly on Saturday, four days before John Jones was to replace Bob Harlan as the team’s chairman and chief executive officer.


The team announced Jones is taking a leave of absence for personal reasons, then cited “management concerns” involving Jones, who was selected more than a year ago to replace the retiring Harlan.

Though no team officials would say exactly what those concerns were, it appears unlikely that Jones ever will run the Packers.

Harlan has agreed to remain in charge until the team’s executive committee decides what course to take.

Three weeks ago, Harlan went to the committee with concerns about Jones.

Executive committee member Peter Platten said “management issues” came to light several months ago.

“I felt I owed it to the organization,” Harlan said. “I report to the executive committee, and it was my obligation to keep the executive committee informed about anything that I thought was going on in the organization, which I do all the time, and this was an issue I thought we needed to look at.”

Asked whether it was one specific incident involving Jones, Harlan said: “I think ‘management issues’ describes it well. It’s not (a) management issue. It got to the point where I felt I needed to go to the executive committee. It was done at this time because I felt I needed to report to that committee before I left the position.”

Jones, a former journalist who worked for the Jacksonville Jaguars during their early days as an expansion team and had two stints in the NFL’s front office, was hired by the Packers on Feb. 10, 1999, as senior vice president of administration. He was promoted to executive vice president and chief operating officer on Oct. 16, 2001.

On Oct. 12, 2005, the Packers’ board of directors, at Harlan’s suggestion, approved a succession plan that would make Jones the team’s president in May 2006 and the team’s CEO upon Harlan’s retirement in May 2007.

“I thought I had it very well planned, and something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred,” Harlan said. “And now we have to deal with it.”

Jones, 55, did not attend Saturday’s news conference. He had emergency heart surgery on June 11, 2006, and didn’t return to work full-time for several months.

“It’s been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects,” Jones said in a statement released by the team. “I need to step back and recharge my batteries. I will take this leave of absence. The executive committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interests of the Green Bay Packers to take this step.”

Though Jones never would discuss the surgery or the nature of his medical problem, his limited work schedule hampered the Packers’ plan to slowly make him the face of the organization by increasing his public appearances during the 2006 season.

Platten wouldn’t answer questions regarding Jones’ health, but medical concerns were not believed to be an issue in the move. Platten also said it had nothing to do with “personal conduct or ethical violations.”

Following the widely popular Harlan was going to be a difficult task regardless, but Jones never seemed to gain the full support of those who worked under him. In recent months, several team employees expressed concerns about Jones to at least one executive committee member.

Instead of meeting on Wednesday to officially hand control of the team to Jones, the Packers’ board of directors will convene to decide what to do next. Platten said it could take up to a year to resolve the situation.

“This has been a very intense process over a relatively short period of time,” Platten said. “We achieved the result we hoped we would, and John has also. What we do now is go from this point and evaluate the situation and go forward as we feel appropriate.”

Harlan was forced to retire this year because the team’s bylaws call for mandatory retirement at age 70. Harlan turned 70 last Sept. 9, but the bylaws allowed him to remain in charge until the board meeting the following spring. Harlan was to continue with the team as chairman emeritus and already had begun moving his belongings into a new, smaller office at Lambeau Field.

“As the executive committee knows, I would do anything for this organization,” Harlan said. “I didn’t think for an extra second when they asked me if I could come back and do this. I’m honored to do it.”

In searching for a new chairman and CEO, the Packers will consider candidates from inside the organization and from other NFL teams.

The most likely internal candidate is Andrew Brandt, 46, the team’s vice president of player finance/general counsel. He has been with the Packers since 1999 and is their chief contract negotiator and salary-cap manager.

Vice president of finance Vicki Vannieuwenhoven and vice president of administration Jason Wied were recently promoted and could receive interviews.

Former Packers executive Mike Reinfeldt, who was hired in February to be the Tennessee Titans executive vice president and general manager, also could be a candidate, though it may be difficult to lure him away from his new job.

Had he not left the Packers in 1998 to follow Mike Holmgren to the Seattle Seahawks, Reinfeldt was on track to be Harlan’s eventual replacement.

Other NFL candidates likely would need to have experience working for a small-market team.

If Jones is out for good, and it appears he is, I'm surprised. Harlan had many years to gauge his performance. If Jones wasn't the right guy for the job, why did it take until a week before his annointment to realize he wasn't qualified? I'd vote for Brandt as a replacement but would prefer Reinfeldt.

[Willard]

This is intriguing. I think there are 2 possible explanations (neither of which directly involves his ticker):

#1: JJ has been showing signs of mental decay, possibly brought on by a combination of the enormous stress of his pending responsibilities, his brush with death, or early stage Alzheimers. If he were incompetent it would have shown in the previous 8 years. Apparently it didn't. This points to some sort of mental breakdown resulting in serious "management issues".

--Or--

#2: Everybody who works for JJ hates his guts. How did this escape the attention of the seemingly alert Harlan? My guess is JJ is great at managing "up". In other words, he is one of these guys (whom I have seen all too often in the business world) who has the full support of the top brass to the chagrin of the middle management who must endure his ineptitudes and crappy way of dealing with people (except the higher ups, of course).

[HarveyWallbangers]

Mike Vandermause column: Harlan made right call

Bob Harlan has a lot of guts, and he proved it Saturday in announcing a stunning decision about the long-term future of the Green Bay Packers.

In one of the shrewdest moves of his 18-year tenure as head of the Packers, Harlan essentially sacked his hand-picked successor, John Jones.

It was a courageous act, considering Jones was scheduled to take over the reins of the organization from Harlan on Wednesday.

Harlan’s nice-guy image is well deserved, but as a leader, he can also be ruthless when it comes to promoting and protecting the Packers’ best interests.

Harlan’s tenure as head of the team has been marked by difficult, sometimes gut-wrenching maneuvers. He fired Tom Braatz as general manager in 1991, pulled the Packers out of Milwaukee for financial reasons in 1994, got his hands dirty in a contentious Lambeau Field renovation battle in 2000, and stripped Mike Sherman of his general manager duties in 2005.

But no decision could have been harder, or more significant, than the one he made to pull the plug on Jones’ ascendancy to the Packers’ throne.

Harlan was grim-faced at a Memorial Day weekend press conference in the team’s media auditorium. Asked whether he felt disappointed for Jones, Harlan replied: “Absolutely. It’s a difficult situation. I’m disappointed for John and for his family.”

Harlan groomed Jones for the job, so it couldn’t have been easy to admit he made a mistake. Harlan was just days from retirement and could have strolled into the sunset and never looked back.

Instead, Harlan agreed to continue working full-time as the Packers’ chairman and chief executive officer until a suitable successor is found, which could take up to a year.

Harlan is as honest as they come. When he looks you in the eye and says he has the good of the team at heart in every decision he makes, you can believe him.

His about-face decision on Jones is a prime example. Harlan had serious concerns and unresolved issues about Jones’ leadership ability. As a result, he received the blessing of the Packers’ executive committee to keep Jones out of power.

“This was an incredibly difficult decision,” executive committee member Peter Platten said. “But it was a decision we knew we had to make.”

Officially, Jones is taking an indefinite leave of absence, with pay, for personal reasons. In reality, he never will work for the Packers again, and the two sides will try to work out a severance package.

The timing of the decision is somewhat puzzling, considering Jones has worked for the Packers since 1999 and was pegged as Harlan’s successor 18 months ago. Why did it take so long to determine he wasn’t up to the job?

“Management issues came to light several months ago,” Platten said. “But when you consider how much John has done for the organization already, we were hoping that they would subside enough so that he could take the title.”

The unspecified issues surrounding Jones didn’t go away, leading to his ouster.

The only way Harlan could be happy in retirement is knowing, beyond a doubt, that he was leaving the Packers in good hands. Otherwise, his conscience would have bothered him the rest of his life.

Harlan knew the marriage between Jones and the Packers wouldn’t work. Instead of subjecting the team to an uncertain future, he made a tough call, and the right call.

[GrnBay007]

Harlan was grim-faced at a Memorial Day weekend press conference in the team’s media auditorium. Asked whether he felt disappointed for Jones, Harlan replied: “Absolutely. It’s a difficult situation. I’m disappointed for John and for his family.”


Harlan groomed Jones for the job, so it couldn’t have been easy to admit he made a mistake.


His about-face decision on Jones is a prime example. Harlan had serious concerns and unresolved issues about Jones’ leadership ability. As a result, he received the blessing of the Packers’ executive committee to keep Jones out of power.



“Management issues came to light several months ago,” Platten said. “But when you consider how much John has done for the organization already, we were hoping that they would subside enough so that he could take the title.”

ouch. now this stuff does not sound health related. Too bad, but I'm glad Harlan is staying on.

[Packnut]

It does'nt sound like the health thing is the cause. Sounds more like a huge difference of direction between Harlan and Jones. Jones obviously had plans Harlan did'nt like. The timing of this tells us Jones voiced his unhappiness about something to Harlan and it just happened. Nothing else explains the timing issue. Anything else such would have been discovered before this recent event.

[GrnBay007]

The timing of this tells us Jones voiced his unhappiness about something to Harlan and it just happened. Nothing else explains the timing issue. Anything else such would have been discovered before this recent event.

You don't suppose Jones wanted Moss and voiced his disappointment in not getting him??? lol :P :wink:

[Joemailman]

Maybe Jones wanted to put a dome on Lambeau.

[the_idle_threat]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.


I have the Billiard room.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Kiwon]

Profootballtalk.com's take:

Our guess is that Jones quietly will fade into the background, and that the team will hire a new president after the 2007 season.

Ha, ha. I've got the perfect candidate......


Bob Harlan speaking......

"Ladies and Gentlemen, it's my pleasure to introduce you to the new president of the Green Bay Packers, a familiar face to us, Mr. Mike Sherman!"

[the_idle_threat]

Word on the street is that they pulled the rug out from under John Jones when they found out Vince McMahon was interested in the job.

[Scott Campbell]

Well obviously Harlan would have no problem firing Ted if it were necessary.

[GBRulz]

Yeah, I'm convinced it's not health issues after seeing their PC and also reading the articles posted here. Of course there will be speculation about different things, but I'm glad Harlan stepped in and did this.

I know there is a bylaw about him having to retire at 70, but I would be all for letting him stay as long as he can lead this organization. Bob Harlan has done wonders for this organization.

I'm not sure Brandt is the answer. He's good at what he does, but he's not very personable which would huge in this role. A few examples of why I personally don't like the guy...

Many people have told me that he was part of a cover up for a former Packer in the administration who sexually assaulted someone in the Anduzzi's parking lot a few years back.

My friend accidentally put a golf ball through his window once before and he was beyond an asshole about it. He wasn't even home at the time, but we went up to his house and told his wife. My friend got a call later from Brandt saying basically pay for the window or get sued......

There was something about how he went to law school but was never allowed to get his license in any state to practice law. Not quite sure what the whole story was about that. I dunno - I just don't care for him ethics-wise, but I will admit that he knows his stuff.

[pbmax]

If true about Moss, then he deserved this fate :lol:

I have considered asking MTP to demote Bretsky for this, from Grail Rat to Beer Cozy Rat, but as I have no authority over him, its been easy to live with inaction.

I wish I had a Packer organizational chart to help pinpoint where the friction could have been. I doubt it was the two he recently promoted. I also doubt they get the call.

But I wonder was it business side related or football side related?

And while Wolf was a PR genius compared to T2 and McCarthy, he doesn't have the business background that the last three choices have had.

My guess at this early stage is Brandt.

Did anyone else high up in the Packers org leave with Holmgren for Seattle? Thompson, Reinfeldt, Dorsey, coaches, anybody else?



The timing of this tells us Jones voiced his unhappiness about something to Harlan and it just happened. Nothing else explains the timing issue. Anything else such would have been discovered before this recent event.

You don't suppose Jones wanted Moss and voiced his disappointment in not getting him??? lol :P :wink:

[Joemailman]

Interesting article in which Harlan acknowledges that health was not an issue. He holds out the possibility that Jones could return in some capacity, although I find that hard to believe.


Harlan's change of heart leaves unanswered questions
By DON WALKER
dwalker@journalsentinel.com
Posted: May 27, 2007

Seven years ago, Bob Harlan was the face of the Green Bay Packers as he lobbied and argued passionately that Lambeau Field, the home of the organization he had devoted much of his life to, needed a major makeover.

At Harlan's side much of that time was John Jones, whom Harlan had brought to Green Bay in February 1999 as his successor.

As the two lobbied state legislators and local politicians, the two often worked out an effective good cop-bad cop routine. Harlan, always the public relations professional, tried to stay above the politics and the back-biting over the thorny issue of public financing of sports stadiums.

Jones, on the other hand, was the guy who made his points to the movers and shakers behind closed doors, often in a very up-front way.

The two different styles worked. The Legislature approved a bill giving Brown County voters an opportunity to vote on a sales tax that was a key part of the financing package. And Brown County voters ultimately approved the measure.

The renovation of Lambeau Field was the crowning moment of Harlan's career and helped ensure financial success for the Packers. At the same time, Harlan often credited Jones for his work and street smarts in getting the Packers to their goal.

But as Harlan was getting ready to retire this month and turn the Packers over to Jones after years of grooming him for the top job, something went awry. At a hastily called news conference Saturday, both Harlan and Peter Platten, secretary of the team's Executive Committee, used the cryptic phrases "management issues" or "management concerns" to describe what caused the Executive Committee to put the brakes on Jones' ascension to the top job.

The two provided few details but the result is that Jones, the team's president, won't be taking over as the team's chairman and chief executive officer, as he was scheduled to do on Wednesday. He is now on a mutually agreed upon leave of absence, a year after he became team president.

In his place stands Harlan, who has agreed at the age of 70 to remain in charge until the Executive Committee decides what to do next.

The stunning turn of events leaves the Packers looking like a franchise in disarray. At a time when fans have openly questioned the work general manager Ted Thompson has done to rebuild the football team, and the furor over quarterback Brett Favre's desire for the Packers to sign wide receiver Randy Moss put the team on the defensive, there are plenty of questions about the direction of the front office.

When will it be resolved? It could be a year, team officials said.

In a telephone interview Sunday afternoon, a glum-sounding Harlan chose his words carefully as he tried to explain why the shakeup had to happen.

He also dismissed any notion that Jones, 55, who had open-heart surgery in June 2006, had to step aside for health reasons. The franchise's refusal to discuss in any detail the circumstances surrounding Jones' illness had raised speculation about Jones' ability to handle the pressures of running a storied franchise.

"Health was not an issue," Harlan said.

According to Platten, the management issues came to light several months ago. Harlan said he was informed by staff at the Packers - he said it was more than one person - who raised "management issues' involving Jones.

"We started hearing about management issues," Harlan said. "In the last three weeks it became very prominent. More than one person brought this to my attention."

Harlan said the problems did not revolve around personal conduct or ethical issues, but declined to provide further detail.

However, an NFL source familiar with the situation said Harlan kept hearing concerns from employees who questioned Jones' ability to manage.

Harlan then went to members of the team's Executive Committee, to which he reports, and reported what people were saying, the NFL source said.

The committee, a powerful and influential body of CEOs and other professionals, met with Jones last week and discussed the problems. The committee then made the decision to put Jones on an indefinite leave of absence and study the matter further.

Jones agreed to the leave, team officials said.

"It's been very difficult," Harlan admitted Sunday. "Out of respect for John and his family, I don't want to say much more."

Asked about his own relationship with Jones, Harlan said he and Jones "worked well together.

"We agreed on most everything," Harlan added. "I felt comfortable with him."

In his new book, "Green and Golden Moments," written with former Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist Dale Hofmann, Harlan says very little about the man he groomed to take over the franchise.

"John is very capable, and I know he'll do a good job for us," Harlan writes. "He's surrounded by an excellent administrative staff and good football people. He just has to move forward and protect a very sacred franchise. And he'll do it."

Harlan, notes, however, that Jones "understands that the most important thing we do is on Sunday afternoons."

Meanwhile, the status of Jones' future with the franchise and in what capacity is not known. Platten made reference to the fact that Jones was on a leave of absence, and was not dismissed, which could be interpreted that he might return someday. Harlan said Sunday that it was possible Jones could return to the franchise and assume control.

"Yes, we could bring 'JJ' back at some point," Harlan said.

But until the matter is fully resolved, Jones will be on leave, and will have no decision-making responsibility with the club, Harlan said.

Jones did not return a phone call for comment.

Should Jones not return in the same capacity, other possibilities include Mike Reinfeldt, a former Packers employee and now general manager of the Tennessee Titans, and Andrew Brandt, the Packers' vice president of finance.

Paul Jadin, who was mayor of Green Bay during the debate over the stadium sales tax, said Sunday that Jones was as responsible for the success of the new Lambeau Field as Harlan was. But he said that, while he was shocked that the news that Jones was out came so fast, he was not shocked that it was going to happen.

"My perception is that there was a culture shock there," said Jadin, who is CEO of the Green Bay Area Chamber of Commerce. "The change from Bob to John was stark. I just don't think that anyone there was prepared to go from Bob to John in terms of personality. That was apparent to me."

Asked how the two differed in style and personality, Jadin said he would only speak about Harlan.

"Bob was nurturing," Jadin said. "He saw the Packers as an extension of his family. John, a little less so."

Jadin also gave credit to Harlan for acting over the weekend.

"I do believe that Bob saw that this was not heading in the direction he hoped," Jadin said. "He did what he felt was right."

Pat Richter, the former University of Wisconsin athletic director who sits on the Packers' board of directors, said the news events of the weekend came out of the blue for him. But Richter said that, whatever the reason for Jones stepping back, Harlan would right the Packers' ship.

"Bob has the capacity to stay on longer," Richter said. "I'm sure he was hoping to take a rest."

Harlan won't get one now. For years, Harlan has said he always tried to have a succession plan in place should the unforeseen happen. Harlan, in fact, had told Jones in the past year that Jones should start thinking about his successor.

Now that the unforeseen has happened, Harlan and the Executive Committee will have to go back to the drawing board.

Tom Silverstein of the Journal Sentinel staff contributed to this report.[/b]

[Scott Campbell]

Meanwhile, the status of Jones' future with the franchise and in what capacity is not known. Platten made reference to the fact that Jones was on a leave of absence, and was not dismissed, which could be interpreted that he might return someday. Harlan said Sunday that it was possible Jones could return to the franchise and assume control.

"Yes, we could bring 'JJ' back at some point," Harlan said.


Who is Bob trying to kid here?

[Tarlam!]

What the heck is this all about?

Is someone suggesting that within 8 years, no one recognized the issues with JJ going foward? It came down to the final 1/2 week?

There is a "something's rotten in Denmark" feeling about this.

[Patler]

The somewhat amazing thing to me is that several reporters have written articles from the perspective of "this doesn't surprise me." Even the former Mayor of Green Bay found it not surprising. Whatever surfaced was apparently significant.

I've seen it in the business world, just as someone else described it. Sometimes people ascend beyond their capabilities. Perhaps I shouldn't say capabilities, maybe the better word is "suitabilities". Not every great "right-hand man" is a capable leader himself. Until recently, Jones was simply Harlan's right-hand man, and apparently quite good at it. Since about a year ago, some duties and responsibilities were transferred to Jones. Perhaps his unsuitableness surfaced since then. They would naturally want to give him time to settle in, and for others to get accustomed to a new style. As the day of reckoning approached, it may have become clear that it would not work.

I give the Packers credit. I've seen businesses stick with a poor decision much too long. The Packers seemed to have dealt with a problem before it affected the health of their business.

[Patler]

What the heck is this all about?

Is someone suggesting that within 8 years, no one recognized the issues with JJ going foward? It came down to the final 1/2 week?

There is a "something's rotten in Denmark" feeling about this.

I could see it not really surfacing until recently, given some of the facts in this situation.

Many, many great assistant coaches, offensive and defensive coordinators and highly successful college head coaches have failed miserably as NFL head coaches. Jones could have been a great assistant, but perhaps not cut out for the Presidency.

Why would they have waited so long? They really didn't. Until about a year ago (really, a few months less, I think) nothing had changed, even though Jones was the successor in waiting, so to speak. Last summer/fall a partial transition was to occur, which ended up being delayed several months because of Jones' heart attack. For a while he was on a limited work schedule. When he finally did start exercising his new authority, initial problems would be attributed to him learning the new job, others getting accustomed to a new person in charge, etc. They would have to give everyone time to adjust.

As the final day approached, (and apparently Harlan brought it up several weeks ago already) they asked themselves, "Should we really go ahead with this?"

It's a bit unusually, I agree. But as someone has already noted, it isn't too far removed from Wolf's handling of the Ray Rhodes situation. Recognize a mistake and deal with it before it ruins you.