JONES WON'T BE BACK: EXPOSE & PREDICTIONS! [Archive]

View Full Version : JONES WON'T BE BACK: EXPOSE & PREDICTIONS!

TopHat

05-27-2007, 09:10 AM

TOP HAT'S EDITORIAL: NO SURPRISE. EXE POLITICS. FASCINATING.

http://packerama.blogspot.com/

WILL JONES BE BACK?

The Press-Gazette is hinting the answer will be "no." It also says: "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."

So it's beginning to look like it may have been Jones' management style as much as anything else. I don't have that much personal experience with him, but I do with Harlan, who is basically a nice guy, easy to get along with, although willing to pull the trigger when he has to. Jones, on the other hand, has experience in the NFL front office, notably as the spokesman for its labor negotiations, something that requires more of a tough-guy image than being President of All The Packers.

It'll be interesting to see: 1. How long this takes to sort out. They're taking a process that had been done with a clear favorite and starting from scratch. And considering the fact that Harlan was the first not-born-in-Green-Bay leader, it's hard to believe they'll stray too far from somebody with Packers experience. 2. What sort of reception this gets at the stockholder meeting. That thing is very tightly controlled, but it'll be hard to deal with fans, already angry about Thompson for not giving Brett Favre everything he wants, if they want better answers than we're all getting now.

Jones steps down.

Peter Platten, speaking on behalf of the Packers’ Executive Committee at a late-afternoon press conference at Lambeau Field, said there were “management concerns” about Jones. Platten added, however, that those concerns didn’t involve personal conduct or ethical violations by Jones. The Executive Committee will meet Wednesday to continue discussions on how to proceed in this matter.

Wow...just wow. This one's going to take a while to figure out - health? Disagreements with the executive committee? (It sure seems they've meddled in stuff before.) Disagreement between the committee and Jones on Ted Thompson's draft picks or the Brett Favre "trade demand"? Right now, it's anybody's guess. But it's a shocker.

EARLIER POST: Here's a stunner: John Jones is taking a "leave of absence" from being president of the Packers, with Bob Harlan filling in. The story from WBAY: On Saturday the Packers announced president and Chief Operating Officer John Jones has taken a leave of absence for personal reasons. Bob Harlan will continue to serve as principal executive of the Green Bay Packers, how long hasn't been determined. Speaking on behalf of the team's Executive Committee, Peter Platten said "We determined that it would be mutually beneficial for John to take a leave of absence while we continue our evaulation of the situation and collectively determine next steps, John will be on leave until the Executive Committee and John conclude that process."

Jones said "It's been a difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects. 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." In June of last year, Jones underwent open heart surgery. He was back at work a few months later. There's a press conference coming later today. And we'll withhold speculation until then.
__________________________________________________ ____________________________

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=646940&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f 646940.html

Jones days in Green Bay appear over.

PackerReport.com’s Todd Korth was at Lambeau Field today as Packers president Bob Harlan and Executive Committee member Peter Platten answered questions regarding the decision to put John Jones on a leave of absence. Korth provides his opinion on why Jones’ ‘leave’ seems more like a dismissal.

__________________________________________________ _______________________________

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070527/PKR07/705270670/1989

Mike Vandermause column: Harlan makes his toughest decision

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 deserved, but as a leader, he can 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. When asked if he felt disappointed for Jones, Harlan replied: "Absolutely. It's a difficult situation. I'm disappointed for John and for his family."

It was Harlan who groomed Jones for the job, so it couldn't have been easy to admit he made a mistake. It was Harlan who 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 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 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," Packers 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 attempt to work out a severance package. The timing of the decision is 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.
__________________________________________________ ______________________________

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070527/PKR01/705270673/1989

Jones out as CEO before he starts. Harlan's expected replacement likely is finished with Packers due to 'management concerns'

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 are, 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.

Harlan said he went to the committee three weeks ago 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...."
__________________________________________________ __________________________

http://packerfansunited.blogspot.com/

Management Concerns" Behind Jones' Leave of Absence

At a press conference today addressing the abrupt leave of absence for incoming CEO John Jones, additional details came to light. Prime among them was that outgoing CEO Bob Harlan apparently approached the Packers' Executive Committee about three weeks ago with concerns over Jones. The concerns, though, according to reports, stretch back several months. While Jones' own comments on the situation hint that the leave of absence may be for health reasons, the Packers aren't commenting on that. As an employer, they likely can't state anything about that publicly. And if there are other concerns, they may not be able to say anything about that publicly as well, at least at this time.

It is a very curious situation. From what has been said to what hasn't been said, as well as the timing and the fact that Jones is Harlan's hand-picked successor who has been groomed to take over the helm upon Harlan's retirement, which was supposed to be in effect this coming week. As it stands, Harlan will remain in charge until the situation can be remedied one way or another.

Harlan's Retirement Delayed: Jones Takes Leave of Absence.

Bob Harlan, long-time President and CEO of the Packers, was all set to step into retirement this next week and become Chairman Emeritus. His hand-picked successor, John Jones, was to take over. But now? Not. Or at least, not yet. According to a press release from the Green Bay Packers "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.'" Jones had health problems not that long ago. One has to wonder what the nature of this leave of absence is all about. Stay tuned.
__________________________________________________ ___________________________

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-packers-harlan&prov=ap&type=lgns

Packers exec Harlan delays retirement as successor takes leave.

Bob Harlan will delay his retirement as the Green Bay Packers' chief executive officer because hand-picked successor John Jones is taking a leave for personal reasons. The Packers announced Saturday that Jones is taking an indefinite leave of absence from the team because of "management concerns." In a hastily arranged news conference, Packers executive committee member Peter Platten said he could not provide specifics about the nature of the concerns. "But I will tell you that they did not involve personal conduct or ethical violations," Platten said. It was not clear whether the concerns are related to Jones' recent health problems, although Jones seemed to hint at that in a statement issued by the team.

"It's been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects," Jones said. "I need to step back and recharge my batteries." Jones had open-heart surgery in June 2006, but has appeared to be in good health in recent months. He represented the Packers at NFL meetings in Nashville earlier this week. Jones was not present at the news conference on Saturday. "The issues have been discussed in detail with John," Platten said. "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." Platten was unwilling to discuss any concerns the team's leaders might have about Jones' health. "I'm not going to talk about health concerns," Platten said. "I can't. OK?"

Jones' surgery last year came less than two years after Mark Hatley, the Green Bay Packers' vice president of football operations, died at his home July 27, 2004, of a heart attack at the age of 54. Asked about Jones' statement, Platten said, "Those are his words. It's just not appropriate for the Green Bay Packers to comment on them. Platten said the team was "constrained by certain legal parameters of what we can say about that situation." He said Jones will be paid during his leave of absence, and he hoped the issue would be "fully resolved" within a year. Harlan, who was on the verge of retirement after 18 seasons as the team's top executive, now will remain in place indefinitely. Harlan was supposed to have stepped down as chairman and CEO this week, but remain with the team as chairman emeritus.

Harlan said the team has informed NFL commissioner Roger Goodell about the situation, and sought to reassure Packers fans the team is well prepared to move forward. "We're going to fight to keep this organization among the elite organizations in the National Football League, and I'm very comfortable that we're going to get that accomplished," Harlan said. Harlan, who earlier this week became emotional as he contemplated the end of his tenure, said he didn't have any second thoughts about abruptly putting off retirement. "I was adjusting myself to change the way I was going to live," Harlan said. "But as the executive committee knows, I would do anything for this organization. I didn't think an extra second when they asked me if I would come back and do this. I'm honored to do it."

Both Harlan and Platten said their management concerns about Jones have been apparent for months, but they were hoping the issues would be worked out in time for Jones to take over for Harlan. "Management issues came to light several months ago, but when you consider how much John has done for the organization already, we were hoping that they would subside enough to that he could take the title," Platten said. "They did not, so we felt it was in the mutual interests for John and for us for him to take the leave."

Harlan picked Jones, a journalist for 13 years before joining the league and becoming an administrator for the NFL's management council, to become his eventual successor in 1999. Harlan said he didn't have any concerns about Jones' character. "No, not at all," Harlan said. "This is a management situation. I was the one that brought John Jones in here eight years ago to be my successor, and I told him that when I hired him." Harlan said he and the team are not beginning to look at other potential candidates to become his successor. "We haven't even started a conversation like that," Harlan said. "This is something that we're just dealing with now."
__________________________________________________ _____________________________

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=611059

Harlan stays on as Packers president. Groomed successor Jones on leave; reason is unclear.

Eight years ago, Bob Harlan hired John Jones to be his eventual successor as president, chief executive officer and chairman of the Green Bay Packers.But Harlan recently brought up concerns to the Packers' executive committee about Jones' ability to manage the National Football League franchise. Committee secretary Peter M. Platten III announced Saturday that the succession plan was on hold and Harlan would forgo his imminent retirement to remain the team's leader for as long as one year.

At a hastily called news conference in Green Bay, Platten said Jones - the Packers' president and second-in-command to Harlan - has taken a paid leave of absence. Jones' unexpected withdrawal halted the organization's plan to transfer its top leadership position from Harlan to Jones by the end of May. "Management concerns involving John Jones became apparent to the executive committee," Platten said. "We have concerns about management issues that need to be resolved before he could go to the CEO position. . . . Management issues came to light several months ago but . . . we were hoping that they could subside enough so that he could take the title. They did not, so we felt it was in the mutual interest for John and for us for him to take the leave for now." Platten said the concerns were not over Jones' personal conduct or ethics.

Surprisingly, it was Harlan who, about three weeks ago, blew the whistle on his protégé. "I think 'management issues' describes it well," Harlan said. "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." Harlan also would not specify what the concerns were. Jones was not at the news conference but released a statement through the team. "It's been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects," Jones said. "I need to step back and recharge my batteries. . . . The executive committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interests of the Green Bay Packers to take this step."

Health may be issue. Although no one has said so publicly, it's possible the sudden move may have to do with Jones' health and whether he can handle the rigorous demands of the job. Jones had open-heart surgery in June 2006, right after he was elected as the team's 10th president on May 31. The Packers have kept a lid on any information about the surgery, Jones' recovery or his health status. During last season, the 55-year-old Jones generally kept a low profile in the community and with the media, but by October the team said he was functioning full time and meeting his administrative duties. But speculation began as early as last fall whether Jones would be able to take over for Harlan. The Packers' public relations office turned down requests by the Journal Sentinel to interview Jones about his medical status.

Then rumors began to circulate weeks ago that the executive committee would ask Harlan, 70, to stay on. Harlan told a Journal Sentinel reporter two weeks ago that he intended to retire by the end of May. Meanwhile, Jones represented the Packers at NFL meetings in Nashville last week. Members of the executive committee did not return phone calls about the rumors involving Jones. But on Saturday Harlan revealed he began talking to the executive committee about Jones three weeks ago. "I have heard the issues and felt I owed it to the organization (to disclose them)," 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. And this was an issue I thought we needed to look at." Citing legal constraints, neither Harlan nor Platten would address any health-related concerns about Jones.

Jones could return. Harlan hired Jones in 1999 as senior vice president of administration. Jones gradually moved up the Packers' front office ladder to oversee the team's financial success, and had a major role in the Lambeau Field renovation and atrium construction, with Harlan grooming him as a potential candidate to run the organization. That culminated with Jones' appointment to the role of president, right before the medical emergency last year. "Not only did I have this plan in place for him, but a year ago I was the one who went to the board of directors at the main meeting and suggested that we make him president for my final year to help get him more acclimated," Harlan said. "This is strictly a management issue," Harlan added. "It's a difficult situation. I'm disappointed for John and for his family. I thought I had it very well planned, and something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred, and now we have to deal with that."

There are two issues the team will have to address, one very soon, and one eventually. First, team bylaws require staff retirement by age 70. The executive committee would have to make an amendment or rule change for Harlan to stay on. The next board meeting is Wednesday. "We have the authority as the executive committee to act in the absence of the full board," Platten said. "So we have the authority to do it. We will discuss the whole thing with the board of directors, however." Also, Platten said the executive committee will evaluate Jones and would not rule out the possibility that Jones could eventually assume the CEO position within a year. "I think you can assume from the fact that we put him on leave, that there would be a possibility that he would be able to come back in the future," Platten said. The executive committee hasn't yet considered whether Jones could come back in another role with the team, Platten said.

Harlan also said he hasn't started looking for another successor, and if he does, all he can do is recommend a person. "It's really an executive committee decision. . . . I am not the authority that can hire that individual," Harlan said. Messages left at the homes of Harlan and Jones were not returned. Carl Kuehne, a longtime member of the Packers' executive committee, declined to comment further on Saturday's announcement. As for Harlan forgetting about retirement for a while, he said he was not upset. He has been steadfast in wanting to groom the next generation of Packers leaders so that he could feel he has left the team in capable hands when he does retire. "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 would come back and do this. I'm honored to do it."

Scott Campbell

05-27-2007, 09:30 AM

Rastak

05-27-2007, 09:48 AM

Harlan added. "It's a difficult situation. I'm disappointed for John and for his family. I thought I had it very well planned, and something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred, and now we have to deal with that."

Something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred?

Lot's of intrigue here.

No kidding.....in the other thread someone mentioned maybe a mental issue....that's a good guess. Maybe he just went "Fran Foley" over the last few months. They definately made it sound non medical. I'm pretty sure all the intrigue is for legal reasons while they try and remove him from his position.

RashanGary

05-27-2007, 10:07 AM

Wow...This is just plain wierd. I really hope the Packers don't go into a tail spin. Harlan was great at letting football people do football things. I hope the next guy has the same ability to relinquish control. That really does concern me because a bad president or owner can mean doom and gloom for a franchise.

MJZiggy

05-27-2007, 10:24 AM

I don't think Harlan's going anywhere until he and the board are convinced they have the right person to take over--no matter what the bylaws state. There will be no tailspin with Harlan in charge, of that I'm sure.

Bretsky

05-27-2007, 10:38 AM

Interesting to say the least; looks like it was not healthy like I thought

Control Fanatic ?
Disliked current coaching/GM staff ?

hard to get along with ?

Who knows

Joemailman

05-27-2007, 10:38 AM

I don't think you'll see anyone hired until the end of the season. The Packers will likely want to interview people from outside, and teams will not want to lose a key member of their organization with the season approaching.

esoxx

05-27-2007, 11:15 AM

Whatever the reason, if the Executive Committee's getting a bad vibe from Jones and has concerns, it's best to put the kaboosh on him now versus five years from now when the horse is already out of the barn.

Maybe they felt the guy's in over his head (sort of like Brad Childress being a HC in Minn, sorry Ras). You don't live with a potential mistake you eliminate it (see Les Steckel, Ray Rhodes) before the damage is done. And damage in the NFL usually takes years to correct.

packinpatland

05-27-2007, 12:00 PM

Scott Campbell

05-27-2007, 12:01 PM

Pack_Attack88

05-27-2007, 12:04 PM

good for Harlan!! from day one something irked me about Jones.. they should promote Andrew Brandt now! i dont care if they view him as too young!!

Scott Campbell

05-27-2007, 12:11 PM

good for Harlan!! from day one something irked me about Jones..

Ya know, I had the same feeling about the guy - from day 1 just like you. I kept thinking Major Frank Burns whenever I'd see him.

packinpatland

05-27-2007, 12:13 PM

Exactly how much imput does the person in Harlan's position play as far as the players go? I thought the job was running the organization/business called the Green Bay Packers.

MJZiggy

05-27-2007, 12:28 PM

Exactly how much imput does the person in Harlan's position play as far as the players go? I thought the job was running the organization/business called the Green Bay Packers.

He hires the GM, though I would imagine, his decision is cleared with the Executive Committee and has the same power to remove the GM. Other than that, I think he and Ted talk about personnel matters, but that's as far as it goes.

packinpatland

05-27-2007, 12:39 PM

Once he hires the GM, he doesn't have imput in who to draft, who to go after in FA, that sort of thing?

Packgator

05-27-2007, 12:44 PM

Whatever the reason(s).......this last minute action says it was determined (without question) Jones is not capable of running the organization. What could have been discovered to make such a decision? It must be serious and without question.

packinpatland

05-27-2007, 12:46 PM

Maybe we don't need to know. Maybe this needs to kept in-house. Maybe Jones needs to ride off into what is left of his sunset.

Packgator

05-27-2007, 12:58 PM

Maybe we don't need to know.

Possibly. But by the way yesterday went down........they have created quite a mystery.

Rastak

05-27-2007, 01:04 PM

good for Harlan!! from day one something irked me about Jones..

Ya know, I had the same feeling about the guy - from day 1 just like you. I kept thinking Major Frank Burns whenever I'd see him.

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

pbmax

05-27-2007, 01:05 PM

It has been written before that Harlan had moved to be much more influential with the Executive Committee than previous executives. The implication was that as much as possible, and more than previous administrations, Harlan had great leeway.

If I am not mistaken, didn't Harlan concentrate more of Packer business into the Exec Committee where he had greater control than with the entire board? It was one of the things that let him split the GM and Coach duties despite the precedent of Lombardi doing both.

Wolf had said he couldn't have done the rebuild without Harlan. I always took that to mean Harlan did more than just hire him, Harlan made the promise of complete control come true.

Could it be that Jones allowed more interference with the GM than Harlan liked? Was Jones and his hires the source of all things Moss? Maybe Brett has Jones on speed dial? :lol:

Going back several months means this happened after Jones was officially elevated and had a new job title. It puts us in last summer/fall, likely post-heart attack. If true this rules out this year's draft, Favre' dalliance with retirement after the Bear game and the DL chosen with pick one.

Jones was the Packer representative at the league meetings several weeks ago. Perhaps something went awry then? Something that coincided with concerns on Lombardi Ave?

TopHat

05-27-2007, 04:34 PM

MARCH, 2007--FAN'S REMARKS: "There is a concern about JJ's interest level of being the face of the organization. The guy leading the organizing; shaking the hands of sponsors and other large stakeholders; politicians (which were needed to pass the large stadium initiative), etc. The concern is that he doesn't seem to want to be engaged in this activity, even though it is a big part of that job. Then, I think the health issues, which haven't been allowing him to travel, just make him more reclusive to the people that he needs to be impacting. I don't know him personally, so I can't add a personal twist. The person who told me this seemed to think that Jones won't be a long-termer like Harlan. He had another example or two but I don't recall them. It wasn't until I saw this post that I thought I'd add what I recalled.
I thought it was interesting that some "feelers" had been placed to see if Jones could get offered another job and then "encouraged" to take it....My sense of it was his focus is on running the operations of the business. This is not a bad thing of course. Kind of like being a COO as opposed to the CEO the team thought it was hiring. In the end, he'll be compared to Harlan, who is revered and fueled the resurgence. This situation is not that different than how unfair some will be to the successor to Favre. So maybe the situation is fair and maybe it's not....but the person I spoke with was the one that was asked to inquire about another prospective opening in sports management that might be available....to see if the graceful out was even possible".

TopHat

05-27-2007, 08:25 PM

http://pu2006.typepad.com/packerupdate/

HARLAN STILL LEADER OF THE PACK

Bob Harlan wouldn't come right out and say it, but it’s a virtual certainty that John Jones won’t be the next chairman and CEO of the Green Bay Packers. The 55-year-old, who was expected to take over for Harlan next week, instead has agreed to a forced leave of absence. And while no specific reason was given for the surprising turn of events, the ambiguous phrase “management concerns” was mentioned a number of times during Saturday’s hastily called press conference. “I’m not sure the executive committee was ever 100% behind Jones,” opined a person familiar with the situation. “The Packers are being cryptic, but at the end of the day, I just don’t think the committee was ready to make him the new face of the franchise.” The 70-year-old Harlan will continue as chairman and CEO for the foreseeable future.
Assuming that Jones is out of the running, it’ll be quite interesting to see which names surface as potential candidates in the weeks and months to come. Andrew Brandt, the team’s vice president of player finance/general counsel, is held in very high regard by Harlan and GM Ted Thompson, but his age (46) and relative inexperience could be an issue. “He’d be a terrific choice, but I’m not sure the committee would be comfortable with such a young man running the organization,” added the source. "Then again, after today, who knows what to think?"

the_idle_threat

05-27-2007, 11:40 PM

I don't have an opinion on whether Brandt is a good candidate, but I don't buy the criticism of his age. Brandt is 46. If John Jones (55) was hired 8 years ago to be Harlan's successor, he was hired at age 47.

Of course, Jones was not expected to take over right away, but I think he would have been expected---being the designated and groomed successor and all---to take the job much earlier than this year if Harlan had decided to retire before the mandatory age, or if (perish the thought) Harlan's health had forced him to retire earlier.

In any case, if they want or expect a guy to stay in the job for a long time, then how old can he be when hired? I would think that if a guy shows he's capable of handling the nuts and bolts, and if he's got the right temperment to be the face of the franchise, then he shouldn't have to be 50 years old or more to qualify.

There are questions about Brandt's temperment, but I saw him speak at an informal panel discussion not that long ago and I thought he was fine. Certainly didn't raise any reservations in my mind about his ablilty to deal with people. Who knows what he's like behind closed doors, but I suspect he's not as bad as advertised here.

I might not be at my best either if I just found out somebody put a golf ball through my window, especially if I thought that person was being dismissive about it. On the other hand---like anybody else---I loathe lawyers who use their position to intimidate and cajole others based upon threatened litigation. I wonder what Brandt's side of that story is ... I suspect the two sides are very different.

The allegation that he couldn't get a law license seems pretty far-fetched considering he's the Packers' general counsel.

RashanGary

05-28-2007, 07:40 AM

Once he hires the GM, he doesn't have imput in who to draft, who to go after in FA, that sort of thing?

If he wants to put pressure on the GM to do things "he" wants, he surely could. The GM does have a job at the Presidents disposal so he has a very real and inherant power over all personal decisions.

Bob McGinn said in one of his articals that there are lines of front office personall that are in line for Thompsons job becuase of the "hands off" ownership. Basically, the Packers are unlike many teams with meddleing owners in that they stay out of football opps.

I really hope the next guy keeps his nose out of football operations as much as the last guy did. Bad ownership or meddling upper management can mean doom and gloom. GM's need the support and trust to do in their way or things go bad IMO. That just goes for any job. You have to hire those who know and let them do it their way. NOt all teams do that and the Pres does have the power to do it a different way.

Fritz

05-28-2007, 08:25 AM

My sense of this is that it has nothing to do with whether Jones liked Thompson or not. Jones was in the loop when TT came on board and had he fervently disliked TT it wouldn't have taken until the last minute to get rid of Jones or resolve the issue.

It appears to have something to do with his management style, or lack thereof. Working with Harlan, the two different personalities seemed to feed off one another; perhaps the team saw what Jones, without Harlan, would look like, and didn't like it.

chewy-bacca

05-28-2007, 08:39 AM

I am happy Harlin did the right thing. it would have been easy to wash his hands of all this and go relax. he is a true leader, and had the best for the Pack in mind.

TopHat

05-28-2007, 10:01 AM

http://packerfansunited.blogspot.com/

"Health was not an issue," Harlan says

According to a report in today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel of a telephone interview with Packers' CEO, Bob Harlan, the mutually agreed upon leave of absence of incoming CEO John Jones did not have anything to do with health concerns. As Harlan is quoted as saying, speaking to questions about Jones' health, "Health was not an issue." Harlan reiterated, without really stating it as such, that there were increasing concerns over Jones' management ability. "We started hearing about management issues," Harlan is quoted as saying. According to the article, those concerns were raised by staff members who came to Harlan with their concerns. "In the last three weeks it became very prominent. More than one person brought this to my attention." The issues did not revolve around personal conduct or ethical issues, Harlan said. Details beyond that, however, are still sketchy.
What exactly was raising management concerns at this stage of the transition process from Harlan to Jones may not be known for some time. Or, in a flash of candor from someone in the know, we may also learn what was really going on. For now, it is enough to know that Bob Harlan will continue his capable command. He's earned a well-deserved retirement, no doubt. But first, some more work to be done...which seems to now include finding a new and capable successor.
__________________________________________________ ____________________________________

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=611257

Harlan's change of heart leaves unanswered questions

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....

TopHat

05-28-2007, 10:47 AM

http://www.railbirdcentral.blogspot.com/

We deserve some answers

You've probably heard the big news over the past couple days. John Jones has been forced into a leave of absence by the Green Bay Packer organization. He was to take over as chief executive officer for Bob Harlan, who presumably will hold that position within the organization despite the his mandatory retirement that was to happen by the end of May. But why are the Packers being so secretive about the situation? Why not just come out and say what the problem is? For being a publicly owned team, why so cryptic? The fans and, more importantly, the shareholders of the team deserve some answers.
Many people's first instinct was that John Jones's health issues were the root cause. Jones had recently undergone open heart surgery. But an article in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel confirms the health problems are a non-issue. Don Walker reports, "(Harlan) 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."
A hastily called together Saturday news conference raises some eyebrows. If health isn't the issue, then the Packer brass must not want Jones to take over the leadership of the team. But why? Many, many people trust the judgement of Bob Harlan. They just deserve some answers. Why aren't they being given?
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________

JSONLINE SPORTS POLL OF THE DAY:

Do you think John Jones will eventually return to become CEO of the Packers?

No (96.7%)
Yes (3.3%)

Patler

05-28-2007, 11:17 AM

No, we WANT detailed answers. We don't necessarily DESERVE the details.

RashanGary

05-28-2007, 11:19 AM

TopHat

05-28-2007, 11:54 AM

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=647106&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f 647106.html

Random thoughts on Packers' off-season. PackerReport.com correspondent Dylan Tomlinson offers his opinion on Bob Harlan’s second thoughts on John Jones, the upcoming season, Favre and Ferguson, and more!

:wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/9184/frenchyr1.jpg

woodbuck27

05-28-2007, 01:09 PM

TopHat

05-29-2007, 03:10 AM

http://pu2006.typepad.com/packerupdate/

Ted Thompson looks to be the big winner in the John Jones fiasco. The two men weren’t close and there was a feeling that Jones would ultimately want to hire his own general manager. So while nobody knows who's next in line to replace chairman and CEO Bob Harlan, unless it’s Mike Sherman, Thompson’s future looks more secure today than it did just 72 hours ago.....

8-) http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/9184/frenchyr1.jpg

Fritz

05-29-2007, 06:29 AM

What's kind of funny about all this is that normally an organization would jump at a chance to use health as an excuse to get rid of someone - it's the perfect cover for both sides. So the fact that Harlan has chosen not to use that old health canard is interesting to me.

mraynrand

05-29-2007, 09:53 AM

Terry

05-29-2007, 11:19 AM

You know, what's interesting to me in all this - that is, in all the discussions of this on three different forums - that with the exception of two posters (both in a different forum) the underlying presumption of ALL posts is that IF there is any fault to be found, it must lie within Jones.

I've only see two posts that suggested even the possibility of something else. One that perhaps Jones actually IS the best man for the job but that he mightn't fit the regressive group mindset of the Packers; and the other that this might just be a bone headed decision by Harlan, arguing that it wouldn't be the first one.

I'm not trying to present either argument here, so there's no point in arguing with either. I'm only remarking upon the nearly universal assumption that the Packers must be right and that the weakness or flaw must lie with Jones.

We'll never know, of course.

Fritz

05-29-2007, 11:28 AM

Rastak

05-29-2007, 11:31 AM

Good point, Terry. I would only suggest the assumption that the fault lay with Jones may be at least in part because the way the story goes is that Harlan kept hearing about "management issues" from numerous people within the organization.

Yea, but the odd part is that this guy has been with organizatiion for years. What sort of management issues pop up this suddenly? What a strange story.

pbmax

05-29-2007, 11:42 AM

Does this guy have any track record that would suggest he actually has a source other than friends and family (or a second personality :lol: )?

It would be naive to assume that the GM issue couldn't have played a role, since that position, and its total control over the football side of the equation, was a hallmark of Harlan and his success with Wolf. Any attempt to fiddle with it was bound to give Harlan pause.

But with the minimal amount of detail we have, nothing points to Thompson's involvement.

In fact, I think the reverse would seem to be true from outside the building. Jones has been there for 8 or 9 years, saw Wolf leave, Sherman hired, promoted, demoted and released. He also was there for the Thomspon search, such as it was, given that only one person was interviewed. If he had objections to T2, wouldn't we have heard about by now?

I think its likelier that the new replacement would want to place his own stamp on the franchise and bring in his own guy.

Unless Thompson has Harlan's ear for the business side as well and his buddy Reinfeldt or his direct report Brandt, are going to get the job. Then I can buy an argument that T2 comes out better.

http://pu2006.typepad.com/packerupdate/

Ted Thompson looks to be the big winner in the John Jones fiasco. The two men weren’t close and there was a feeling that Jones would ultimately want to hire his own general manager. So while nobody knows who's next in line to replace chairman and CEO Bob Harlan, unless it’s Mike Sherman, Thompson’s future looks more secure today than it did just 72 hours ago.....

pbmax

05-29-2007, 11:49 AM

You know what? I am talking myself into thinking this may be a plausible exlanation. The one area Harlan has been quickest to assert himself is the relationship between GM and coach.

He hired Wolf knowing he wanted to cede total control over to the GM, as the past coach/GM or coach/director player peronnel hadn't worked out so well. He knew, and wasn't comfortable, that Infante would be rendered weaker, but felt he had to do it as evidence mounted the team was going to continue to struggle. Wasn't Infante here for a least four years?

He failed to hire a new GM after Wolf retired because he didn't want to lame duck Sherman, a newly installed coach, with a GM who would want his own guy.

Only after that situation spun out of control, did he go back to the super GM model and bring T2 in.

Perhaps, like the Sherman elevation, Harlan has interceded to give his new guy and an even newer coach, a chance to finish the plan.

pbmax

05-29-2007, 11:55 AM

On the other hand... :oops:

...as posted earlier, one of the few pieces we have on record are that the concerns were first raised months ago, before this year's FA and draft class started a new round of T2 bellyaching.

And one of the Exec Committee members has publicly stated that there likely was a culture shock going from Harlan to Jones.

If Jones was hell bent on replacing Thompson last summer, after the heart trouble, would they really expect T2 to change the plan by the following summer?

More likely, Jones was told to improve communication with the people who were feeling alienated. This is more standard fare for an improvment plan in a managerial situation. I doubt they expected his hiring preferences for GM to change.

gureski

05-29-2007, 01:16 PM

I want to say up front that I know nothing that hasn't been reported to everyone else. I have no inside info. I'm merely using my brain and common sense to try to find snippits of information that could lead to what really is going on. This is NOT FACT. It's all speculation.

Per the front page of the Sunday Edition of the Journal-Sentinel:

Bob Harlan:
"I thought I had it very well planned, and something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred, and now we have to deal with that."

later in the article, Harlan says:

"This is strictly a management issue. It's a difficult situation. I'm disappointed for John and for his family."

Jones statement includes the following:

"It's been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects... I need to step back and recharge my batteries.... The executive committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interest of the Green Bay Packers to take this step."

First, based on Harlan's comments, this hasn't been in the works for long. He says "something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred". Reports are out about some comments made up to three months ago..... Reports also cite that the team felt that Jones could overcome the issues and thus kept ahead with the schedule to transfer power from Harlan to Jones. For this to pop up now, the week that Harlan is set to leave, tells you that something big happened and it happened suddenly. Maybe something small was found three months ago but in the process of turning over stones, something large was found.

Okay. What occurred?

Harlan says, "...now we have to deal with that."

What do we have to deal with?

Is it sex? Some type of sexual infraction would fit the cryptic message being sent by Harlan and the team's management.

Normally, in situations involving powerful people, the ultimate downfall is related to sex, money, or ego. (sometimes all three) Was an affair found? Was something inappropriate found or reported?

One would like to rule that out because Harlan was adament that Jones didn't do anything improper or personal but more times than not, sex, money, and ego (all personal things) are usually what doom people. Look at Jimmy Johnson and Jerry Jones....money and ego killed that duo. Do you really need an example of how sex can ruin a career? It's everywhere.

IF they found sexual harrassment or an affair between Jones and someone in the company, IF...I'm saying IF...then the team would want to be very careful with any puclic comments in fear of admitting some form of blame in which the employee could use against them in litigation.

In essence, you don't admit blame. You can't admit blame or you may as well hand the blank check over to the "victim's" attorney. You play it straight and hope the lawyers can iron out a settlement that can keep the whole thing from coming out.

I could easily see, based on society today (it wouldn't be the first time) that an affair or some type of sexual encounter or perceived sexual inuendo occurred between Jones and a staffer. The female decides it's a great time to cash in and puts the squeeze on management to compensate her.

This would make Harlan's comments make more sense...especially the part about, "This is strictly a management issue. It's a difficult situation. I'm disappointed for John and for his family."

I'm not saying Jones did something inappropriate. He may be a victim of someone else alleging he did something but just the same, the team would have to put a halt to his taking over until this thing was sorted out. That would explain the comments quoted by the Journal Sentinel from Platten (presumably a member of management or a spokesperson) that said, "Management concerns involving John became apparent to the executive committee,... We have concerns about management issues that need to be resolved before he could go to the CEO position... Management issues came to light several months ago but... we were hoping that he could take the title. They did not, so we felt it was in the mutual interest for John and for us for him to take the leave for now."

Platten goes on to say that there were no personal or ethical issues on behalf of Jones that caused this. Again, if sex or discrimination is involved, they have to say that.

It is certainly possible that this is merely what they say it is.....they were concerned about Jone's ability to manage but if that's the case then the management in control right now should fire themself. This change has been as slow as a transfer as I've ever seen. To wait til days prior to the full transfer to make this move over issues that they would've either known about previously OR should've known about previously is the height of irresponsibility. That goes for Harlan and the Executive Committee. Now, that's IF this was truly about management style or real issues relating to how Jones could do the job.

I don't think that's the truth. I think there is something else there and I think it involves Sex, Money, Ego, or a combination of all the aforementioned.

Look at Jones comments....

"It's been a very difficult year but also a wonderful year in many respects... I need to step back and recharge my batteries.... The executive committee and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interest of the Green Bay Packers to take this step."

He never said it was in his best interest to step aside. He said it was in the best interest of the team.

Sex, money, or ego. It's one of those three. Maybe Jones isn't the bad guy and is actually a victim but that's got to factor into this somehow. It's sex, money, ego, or a combination of all three.

gureski

05-29-2007, 01:25 PM

woodbuck27

05-29-2007, 01:45 PM

Another reason my theory makes sense is that the NFL is cracking down on bad conduct. How could the Packers place Jones at the top of the team if he has some cloud hanging over his head, such as an affair or an allegation of misconduct? They couldn't. Not with the commissioner making examples and taking hard lines with players.

Again, not saying Jones did something. He could be the victim here. He could be an aggressor. All it takes is an allegation and suddenly he's embroiled in a mess.

Sex, money, ego, or a combination......and it doesn't have to be those traits emminating from Jones. It could be one or more of those traits driving someone around him. Put me down for that as the real reason we may or may not find out.

With all respect and not meant just as a contradiction:

I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S EASY TO HIDE AN AFFAIR THESE DAYS.

SO. . .I can't believe that sex is an issue in this decision to dismiss John Jones.

Reports are precise that it was about management style and not health related.

That hints that John Jones was threatening to make some change that was counter to the position of certain powers in the Green Bay Packer organization.

It will come out some day. :)

GO PACKERS !!

gureski

05-29-2007, 02:20 PM

Isn't it possible that the people who have been going to Harlan and members of the board are people who are reporting the affair or activity?

Maybe it's not a secret to those involved but it's been kept under wraps from the rest of us?

TopHat

05-29-2007, 10:37 PM

http://packers.scout.com/2/647375.html

In search of a new prez. Packers likely to look outside of organization for next CEO.

Hey, it’s baseball season, so let’s use a baseball analogy here in describing Green Bay’s change at the top of the front office: Bob Harlan swung and missed twice on thoughtfully preparing the Green Bay Packers organization for his successor. Now Harlan, who was expected to retire later this week, is back up to bat, seeking to connect on the next leader of the Pack. On the mound: Father Time. The Packers’ seven-member executive committee decided over the weekend to put president and chief operating officer John Jones on an extended leave of absence, just days before Father Time’s deadline. Though health doesn’t appear to be the issue with Jones, the executive committee labeled it a “management issue” and have more or less released Jones from his duties with a year’s pay.

Fortunately for the Packers, Harlan has agreed to extend his stay as president. But Father Time isn’t exactly on the side of the 70-year-old Harlan, who was expected to begin his retirement on May 31, the day when Jones was supposed to take over as team president. But something came up regarding Jones in the past month, which Harlan and others in the organization will not specify, that has now caused the Packers to begin thinking about pursuing someone else to be the next president. “I thought I had it very well planned, and something unforeseen and unfortunate occurred, and now we have to deal with that,” Harlan said on Saturday in making the announcement about Jones. Harlan and executive committee member Peter Platten both said that they have yet to think about who the next successor to Harlan will be, but you can bet they are on it as you read this. The next president of the Packers will ultimately be the choice of the executive committee. Besides Harlan and Platten, the prestigious panel also includes Edward Martin, John Bergstrom, Carl Kuehne, John Fabry and Larry Weyers, all of whom are from the Green Bay area.

Harlan hired Mike Reinfeldt in 1991 as the team’s chief financial officer. Besides that role, Harlan also said that he earmarked Reinfeldt as a strong candidate to step in as the eventual team president. Reinfeldt was given the title of Vice President of Administration from 1994-98, overseeing all non-football staff in that time. Mike Holmgren and the Seattle Seahawks lured Reinfeldt away from Green Bay in 1999 as Senior Vice President. He was the Seahawks’ Vice President of Football Administration before he signed on to be general manager of the Tennessee Titans this spring. Whether or not the Packers could lure Reinfeldt back to Green Bay remains to be seen, but Reinfeldt probably is the strongest candidate out there for the job, but since he just began in Tennessee, he may not want to move. Outside of Reinfeldt, some feel that Green Bay’s vice president of player finance/general counsel Andrew Brandt may be a candidate. Brandt, who turns 47 on July 19, joined the Packers in February of 1999 as director of player of finance. Like Reinfeldt, he has been very impressive at handling player negotiations and the team’s salary cap. Brandt is probably the best in-house candidate to be team president.

There is a slight chance that the Packers may agree to have Jones return as president, but that seems very remote. Platten said on Saturday “there would be a possibility that he (Jones) would be able to come back in the future.” However, there wasn’t a whole lot of conviction in Platten’s tone of voice when he made that statement in front of reporters. Jones seemed to have the same out-going personality with fans that Harlan has, which is an important aspect of the position. Especially since the Packers are a publicly owned organization. Apparently Jones' philosophy on whatever it could be rubbed Harlan the wrong way at the wrong time, and now Jones is on the outside looking in. Whoever the Packers pursue, should have those qualities, plus the ability to make cold, hard decisions, like the one that Harlan made this past week on Jones. For now, Reinfeldt appears to be the best candidate, but the Packers probably will be looking closely at others outside the organization as well.

TopHat

05-30-2007, 07:07 AM

DEMOVSKY: "I tried to lay it out as clearly as I could in my story that ran in Sunday's paper. Basically, it sounds like Harlan realized that Jones wasn't the right guy for the job so he basically pulled the plug on him. What exactly the "management issues" were might never be known, however based on talking to several sources it's clear Jones wasn't the best leader. People who worked for him were unhappy, and they made that clear to Harlan. Jones said he needed to "recharge his batteries" but that was the Packers' way of allowing him to save face. He'll be on leave until they get a settlement package worked out, and there's no way Jones ever will work for the Packers again. Reinfeldt is a logical candidate because at one point while he was here he was the heir apparent to Harlan. Maybe he wouldn't leave his new job with the Titans, where's head of the football side, but this would be a chance to run an entire team -- not just the football operations....I further suspect that Harlan was upset about this because Jones had been telling Harlan what he wanted to hear in order to curry Harlan's favor. I think that Harlan caught Jones in a lie, which raised a multitude of concerns about how he was going to lead (and if he was capable of leading) the Packers following Harlan's retirment as Chairman and CEO." But I dont think it was because he was going to fire Thompson...."

TopHat

05-30-2007, 07:44 AM

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/

One Year Later

It is going to take one year to anoint a new team President? How hard is it to find someone who knows the right people and spent some time at an Ivy League school? Proficiency in attending office meetings and kissing ass is desirable. Apparently John Jones wasn't too good at the latter: A source from the National Football League told the Journal Sentinel that Packers employees had told Harlan they had concerns about Jones' ability to manage the franchise. Someone's fur was rubbed the wrong way. Although this subject is as exciting as a press conference, it holds a strange fascination for me. It would be great if Jones really was a jerk who the organization pushed out to maintain the integrity of the Packers, but he probably lost some power struggle. He may have been a jerk, but it is just as likely that he was a good guy who is the scapegoat for something or other. Too bad the real story will ever make it out and we will probably never find out the size of his golden parachute.
__________________________________________________ ___________________________

http://www.rotlalasz.com/

We and Mister, Mister Jones

The first thought at the news John Jones will never lead GBP: This could affect the rest of our lives. I’d also like to call it Bob Harlan’s latest mistake, although that would sound petulant and ungrateful. Harlan is the best thing that happened to GBP in the last 40 years. He hired Wolf and left him alone. He also recognized that a renovated stadium was critical for the franchise’s survival, and pushed that through in tax-me-not Brown County. And he brought thrust and considerable business acumen to an organization that had been a punching clown on and off the field for decades. GBP is now a model corporation in many respects.
But, as with Wolf, Harlan made considerable mistakes late in his tenure: Sherman and Thompson. Wolf was impressive and persuasive, but one wonders why Harlan didn’t do due diligence with those two hires as he did with Wolf. When faced with the promotion of a one-year coach to King of the World, he didn’t look closely. And so our troubles began. A friend of this space with insight into the present situation tells me that Jones’ health was the key factor in the decision, that he has never fully recovered from heart surgery and that his drive is lacking. The team denies that, according to Demovsky. Naturally: They fear sabotaging Jones’ future high-level employment elsewhere.

But both Demovsky and Don Walker of JS Online report that Jones never meshed well with GB employees. Walker leads today with an account of how bad-cop Jones nicely complemented good-cop Harlan during the stadium tax debate, then suggests that such arm-twisting didn’t play well with the underlings: 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.” Demovsky: 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, according to NFL sources familiar with the situation. In recent months, several team employees expressed concerns about Jones to at least one executive committee member, one of the sources said.

The amazing thing about that statement is that those employees didn’t feel confident enough to go to Harlan, although somebody finally did, obviously. On the other hand, backstabbing through executive committee members is a finely-calibrated art in Green Bay, although somewhat under-practiced in recent years. So what do we have? A picture of a guy who was abrasive, a feather-ruffler, the opposite of Harlan, and now weakened by illness. That’s not going to work in GB, where Jones is still regarded by many as a complete outsider: a journalist (OMG) who’d gone straight but served time for the NFL front office and Jacksonville (?!) before landing his gig in GB. And, as the friend puts it, many guys in Green Bay are known for having coronaries on Thursday and showing up for work Monday morning. This franchise is in the middle of having a coronary. Right now we need the old Bob Harlan to show up and administer the nitroglycerin, although a nice mixed grill of Zoloft and Klonopin would be great for the anxiety, too.
__________________________________________________ ___________________________

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070530/GPG0101/705300672/1058/PKRFeatures

Packers board faces leadership question. Harlan succession top order of business today

Today's quarterly meeting of the Green Bay Packers' board of directors was supposed to be John Jones' first day at the team's helm as president and chief executive officer. Instead, after the stunning news over the weekend that Jones is out as replacement for Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Bob Harlan, the 11 a.m. meeting now will take up a topic critical to the franchise's future: How should the Packers search for a new successor to run one of the most historic and revered franchises in American sports? The board first will have to pass a resolution to extend Harlan's stay as chairman and CEO beyond the retirement age of 70 as mandated in the team's bylaws. Harlan will stay in that position until his replacement is in place, which could take anywhere from a few months to as long as a year. Jason Wied, the team's vice president of administration and corporate counsel, was drawing up a resolution on Tuesday to extend Harlan's tenure. Harlan said Tuesday the board won't raise the mandatory retirement age.

Jones officially is on administrative leave. Harlan cited only "management issues" as the reason behind Jones' departure, but it's become clear that Harlan and the team's ruling executive committee over the past several months developed misgivings about Jones because of glitches in the function of the administrative side of the organization, as well as complaints about Jones by subordinates. Jones presumably is on leave until he and the Packers agree on a severance package. The Packers' executive committee now has to decide how to choose Harlan's replacement. One possibility is following the procedure former team President Judge Robert Parins used to promote Harlan as his successor in 1989. For that hiring, Parins formed a search committee comprised of members from both the executive committee and the board as a whole. They vetted candidates for a short list of candidates to interview, after which Parins recommended Harlan to the executive committee. Unlike in '89, it's now common for sports franchises to hire a national search firm to compile a short list of candidates. Harlan and the team's search committee then could interview those candidates and recommend one to the executive committee, which ultimately makes the hire.

It's almost a given the Packers will hire a high-ranking official with an NFL team who has experience in both administrative and league matters. There appear to be only two candidates who work for the Packers: Wied, who is 35, and Andrew Brandt, the team's vice president of player finance and general counsel, who is 46.

Cheesehead Craig

05-30-2007, 09:49 AM

Well, better to not put Jones in charge then have to remove him. Just get it done right.

packinpatland

05-30-2007, 10:29 AM

I still think Jones and TT got caught doing 'something'. :oops: :wink:

packinpatland

05-30-2007, 10:46 AM

Interesting..............a severence package in the works.
And complaining subordinates...

Posted May 30, 2007

By Pete Dougherty
pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com

Today's quarterly meeting of the Green Bay Packers' board of directors was supposed to be John Jones' first day at the team's helm as president and chief executive officer.

Instead, after the stunning news over the weekend that Jones is out as replacement for Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Bob Harlan, the 11 a.m. meeting now will take up a topic critical to the franchise's future: How should the Packers search for a new successor to run one of the most historic and revered franchises in American sports?

The board first will have to pass a resolution to extend Harlan's stay as chairman and CEO beyond the retirement age of 70 as mandated in the team's bylaws. Harlan will stay in that position until his replacement is in place, which could take anywhere from a few months to as long as a year.

Jason Wied, the team's vice president of administration and corporate counsel, was drawing up a resolution on Tuesday to extend Harlan's tenure. Harlan said Tuesday the board won't raise the mandatory retirement age.

Jones officially is on administrative leave. Harlan cited only "management issues" as the reason behind Jones' departure, but it's become clear that Harlan and the team's ruling executive committee over the past several months developed misgivings about Jones because of glitches in the function of the administrative side of the organization, as well as complaints about Jones by subordinates.

Jones presumably is on leave until he and the Packers agree on a severance package.

The Packers' executive committee now has to decide how to choose Harlan's replacement. One possibility is following the procedure former team President Judge Robert Parins used to promote Harlan as his successor in 1989. For that hiring, Parins formed a search committee comprised of members from both the executive committee and the board as a whole. They vetted candidates for a short list of candidates to interview, after which Parins recommended Harlan to the executive committee.

Unlike in '89, it's now common for sports franchises to hire a national search firm to compile a short list of candidates. Harlan and the team's search committee then could interview those candidates and recommend one to the executive committee, which ultimately makes the hire.

It's almost a given the Packers will hire a high-ranking official with an NFL team who has experience in both administrative and league matters. There appear to be only two candidates who work for the Packers: Wied, who is 35, and Andrew Brandt, the team's vice president of player finance and general counsel, who is 46.

MJZiggy

05-30-2007, 02:03 PM

An idea has been in the back of my mind about this. I wonder if Bob Harlan didn't know that Jones was unsuitable for this position and kept it to himself until the last minute because this way, there is no one to take over the position and he gets up to another year on the job before he has to take on the forced retirement that he didn't really want in the first place...

packinpatland

05-30-2007, 03:46 PM

Wouldn't that make him just a bit devious? :evil:

MJZiggy

05-30-2007, 03:49 PM

Well, yes, but he gets to keep his job...

packinpatland

05-30-2007, 05:48 PM

I'm curious what the subordinates were complaining about.

Scott Campbell

05-30-2007, 05:53 PM

TopHat

05-30-2007, 05:55 PM

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=612879

Harlan: Jones' issues surfaced in fall 'I'm probably to blame. I waited...," Packers' chairman tells reporters.

Green Bay - Problems with John Jones' management style began to concern Bob Harlan last fall, Harlan said today in a meeting with reporters at Lambeau Field. Here's what Harlan had to say: "What happened when this came to light last fall, my thought was we are going to be very patient, study this and re-evaluate it as time goes along and see if things improve. I wanted to give him (Jones) every opportunity to see if the situation wouldn't get better and we could move forward. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. And I'm probably to blame. I waited...."

MJZiggy

05-30-2007, 05:56 PM

See? He knew about this last fall, but he's to blame because HE WAITED!!!

packinpatland

05-30-2007, 06:15 PM

Just now on the NFL channel, Marshall Faulk mentioned Jones in one sentence with J Walker, A Green and R Moss. Opportunities missed or dropped.

gureski

05-31-2007, 08:18 AM

It's like I said....

Either Jones was walking around the office in his underwear, slapping secretaries on the behind while lighting cigars with $100 bills (sex, ego, money)

or

This is an example of total incompetence on behalf of management...

it's looking more and more like incompetence. I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt that they couldn't screw things up this bad but apparently......based on Harlan's latest interview......management truly did screw this up that bad.

TopHat

05-31-2007, 09:58 AM

http://packerchatters.com/op-ed/view.php?id=2269

Packers board OKs resolution extending Harlan's tenure

The Green Bay Packers board of directors today unanimously approved a resolution to extend Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Bob Harlan’s tenure with the team. Former Packers player and former Packers executive committee member Jim Temp said Harlan and the executive committee “explained everything from the day it started to today.” “I feel more comfortable after the meeting than I did before because I felt very close to John (Jones),” Temp said. "He’s a wonderful guy and has done so much for the Packers organization. Anybody who knows John feels very badly. Jones was supposed to take the helm as president and chief executive officer, but Harlan announced on Saturday that Jones would not be assuming the position. Coming out of the meeting, Jack Koeppler of Green Bay, a member of the Packers board, said “Bob Harlan has been appointed spokesman for the board.”
Harlan was expected to hold a news conference after the meeting. Robert Parins, former president of the Packers and current board member had this to say after today’s quarterly board meeting, which began at 11 a.m.: “Very agreeable meeting,” is all Parins would say. The resolution extends Harlan's stay as chairman and CEO beyond the retirement age of 70 as mandated in the team's bylaws. Harlan would stay in that position until his replacement is in place, which could take anywhere from a few months to as long as a year. Jones officially is on administrative leave.
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070531/PKR07/705310516/1959

Mike Vandermause column: Questions on Jones answered

Today was supposed to be John Jones' first full day on his dream job as Green Bay Packers chairman and chief executive officer. Instead, he's keeping a low profile in Vermont while taking what the team describes as an indefinite leave of absence. The conspiracy theories have been swirling since the Packers announced Saturday that Jones would not assume control of the organization. Let's attempt to answer some of the burning questions surrounding the situation:

What's the real reason for Jones' demise?

Anyone looking for a smoking gun will be disappointed. Health concerns and misconduct have been ruled out. Beyond that, the Packers have been vague in explaining Jones' departure. "They're management issues which lingered for a number of months," said Bob Harlan on Wednesday following the Packers board of directors meeting. "And we felt that they finally had to be dealt with." Out of respect for Jones' family, Harlan has declined to provide details. That stance has invited wild speculation. But it can be safely assumed Harlan, who will remain in charge until his successor is hired, and the Packers' executive committee concluded Jones wasn't qualified for the job. The Packers don't have to air Jones' dirty laundry in public in order to send that message. The search for specifics will continue, but the most important statement already has been made: Jones wasn't good enough to take control of the team.

Why did it take so long to come to that conclusion?

Harlan and Jones worked side by side for nearly 8 years, and Jones was sacked just four days before taking over the organization. At first glance, it smacks of a major oversight on Harlan's part. It wasn't until last fall, according to Harlan, that concerns about Jones came to light. Even then, Harlan said he wanted to cut Jones some slack. "I wanted to give him every opportunity to see if the situation wouldn't get better, and we could move forward," Harlan said. "Unfortunately, that didn't happen." The two went to war together over the Lambeau Field referendum, so it's plausible Harlan was blind to Jones' flaws. Or, Jones concealed his deficiencies well. But one's true colors eventually show. "I had some incidents myself with John, so I knew that a problem existed," Harlan said of events from last fall. Since then, Harlan said he has no regrets about waiting so long before pulling the plug on Jones. "I didn't want to jump the gun on it," he said. "I wanted to make sure I was giving it a full study before I went to the executive committee."

Is it possible Jones could return?

Harlan and at least two executive committee members have said it could happen. In reality, there's no way Jones will be back. He had several months to improve his management skills and couldn't pull it off. When you're deemed unfit for a big job, spending some down time on the East Coast won't change a thing. The leave of absence was presumably designed to give both sides time to work out a severance package. Legal considerations aside, Jones has worked his last day in Green Bay.

Is the Packers organization in disarray?

Harlan steadfastly denies it. "We're not in disarray," he said. "We're very well organized." The team remains in good hands with Harlan in control. But the future depends on the Packers finding a strong, capable replacement. The sooner that happens, the faster the Jones debacle will be forgotten.

woodbuck27

05-31-2007, 10:35 AM

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=612879

Jones trouble built up
Harlan personally saw management issues

By DON WALKER
dwalker@journalsentinel.com

Posted: May 30, 2007

Green Bay - Bob Harlan said Wednesday that he personally witnessed management problems involving team president John Jones last fall during the football season.

Bob Harlan addresses reporters at a news conference Wednesday.

After seeing it firsthand, Harlan said he tried to be patient to see if the problems might work themselves out and Jones could take over as team chairman of the storied franchise this spring.

The problems didn't go away, Harlan told reporters Wednesday after the team's board of directors meeting at Lambeau Field. As a result, the team announced abruptly on Saturday that Jones, whom Harlan had hired in February 1999 as his heir apparent, would be placed on a paid leave of absence and that Harlan would forgo his retirement until a new transition plan was put in place.

The decision on a leave came from the seven-member committee, which oversees Harlan and Jones. A decision to look for a new candidate now that Jones appears to be out will come later.

"What happened when this came to light last fall, my thought was we are going to be very patient, and study this, re-evaluate it as time goes along and see if things improve," Harlan said.

"I wanted to give him (Jones) every opportunity to see if the situation wouldn't get better and we could move forward.

"Unfortunately, that didn't happen. And I'm probably to blame. I waited. . . I told the people on the staff if you continue to have concerns, please come back to me before I leave because I owe it to the executive committee, which are my bosses, to let them know my situation."

Harlan said he heard from several employees who work in football operations and administration about their concerns regarding Jones' management style. He did not identify any employees but added in response to a question that there was no conflict between Jones and General Manager Ted Thompson.

Since Harlan hired Jones in February 1999, it was clear that Jones would take over the franchise when Harlan retired. Last year, Harlan convinced the team's executive committee and its board of directors that Jones should become team president and work under Harlan until this spring to become more familiar with the football side of the business.

"I thought the plan was working very well, but I could see it falling apart during the fall and it concerned me as it grew," Harlan said.

Despite the dramatic turn of events, Harlan insisted that the team's front office was not in disarray, and that the football operation was moving forward.

"We are not in disarray," he said.

"We are very well organized and we are ready to move forward. My only concern is that we don't hit a gap where we lose a step or two. We need to keep moving forward as quickly as we can."

Asked if he had made a mistake in grooming Jones for the job, Harlan said, "No."

"I thought he was extremely qualified when I brought him on," he said.

"We worked very well together during the early stages. But once this problem surfaced, I wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one seeing it. That's why I wanted to take as much time as possible before we dealt with it. As it continued and escalated, the time came for me to go to the executive committee."

Harlan and other team officials have said that the possibility exists for Jones to return to the team in some capacity. Asked if Jones could return if he properly addressed the unspecified management concerns employees had about him, Harlan was circumspect.

"You know, I don't think I'm qualified to answer that. In all honesty, I witnessed the problems, I dealt with the problems, and I heard what the staff had to say. Then we dealt with that with our executive committee. For me to go beyond that point, I don't think it's fair for me to give an answer."

Harlan said the problems involving Jones existed over several months and didn't improve. When the problems began to escalate employees came to Harlan.

Harlan said he didn't want the matter to linger and said the whole issue could be resolved in less than a year. Should the Packers go looking for a new executive, Harlan said it would have to be someone knowledgeable about the NFL and the issues the league faces.

Harlan said, for example, that by the fall of 2008, the league's collective bargaining agreement could be reopened. The Packers, he said, are dependent on revenue sharing and a league-wide salary cap. If either of those two elements change, he said, the Packers would have a problem.

If the Packers pass on Jones, several candidates are likely to emerge. They include Mike Reinfeldt, a former Packers' executive who is now general manager of the Tennessee Titans.

Internally, Andrew Brandt, the team's vice president of finance, could emerge as a candidate.

Asked about Reinfeldt, Harlan said he could not talk about another team's employee. Neither Reinfeldt nor Brandt returned calls.

Packers officials have not detailed what Jones did as a team executive that would have caused him to fall from favor. An NFL source has said that questions surfaced on Jones' ability to manage the franchise. Publicly, team officials have said he was not put on leave for health reasons or any personal or ethical conduct.

Jones had a health scare last year and underwent open-heart surgery.

Harlan said there had not been any negotiations on a severance package for Jones, who has three years left on his contract.

Harlan said the board of directors unanimously endorsed the executive committee's action to put Jones on a leave of absence. And the board approved a plan that will allow Harlan to stay with the team even though he has reached the team's mandatory retirement age of 70.

The board of directors also approved the nominations of four candidates for the board. Shareholders will vote on the candidates at the team's annual meeting on July 25.

The candidates are:

Mark J. McMullen, chairman and CEO of Associated Wealth Management, Green Bay. McMullen is a former chair of the Green Bay/Brown County Professional Football Stadium District.

Diane L. Roundy, director of business development for Schenck Business Solutions, Greenleaf, Wis.

Mark D. Skogen, owner and general manager of Festival Foods in De Pere.

Mike L. Weller, president of Miller Electric in Appleton.

Cheesehead Craig

05-31-2007, 10:46 AM

For years Jones and Harlan were a great tag team, they seemed to be on the same page with every decision. Then Jones had his big heart surgery in June of last year and we were told not to worry.

According to the reports that have come out, it was several months ago that the complaints started coming in. He was too abrasive, his management style wasn't easy, he bascially didn't play well with others.

People don't complain about their bosses very much and certainly not right away when they feel he/she is doing something wrong. They wait it out to see if it's just a passing phase, and give someone who has been their boss the benefit of the doubt, especially if they just came out of major surgery as nobody wants to look like an uncaring ass. Plus, nobody likes to put their job on the line like that. Challenging your boss is serious business.

Given this, likely it has been 4 maybe 5 months of issues with Jones that the members of the organization had prior to bringing it up to Harlan. Combined with the reports that they had come in for several months after that time that would mean about 8 or 9 months had gone by. This would make it shortly after his heart surgery. Coincidence? I think not.

It seems that Jones came out of his surgery a changed man, this certainly is not uncommon when someone has a major health issue like this. However in Jones' case if appears he did not change for the better when it came to his work relationships as the complaints indicate.

Given that nothing was brought up about the man who had been groomed for years until after the surgery lends weight to this argument.

JMO mind you, but it seems plausible.

woodbuck27

05-31-2007, 10:55 AM

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070531/PKR07/705310516/1989

Posted May 31, 2007

Mike Vandermause column:

Questions on Jones answered

By Mike Vandermause

Today was supposed to be John Jones' first full day on his dream job as Green Bay Packers chairman and chief executive officer. Instead, he's keeping a low profile in Vermont while taking what the team describes as an indefinite leave of absence.

The conspiracy theories have been swirling since the Packers announced Saturday that Jones would not assume control of the organization.

Let's attempt to answer some of the burning questions surrounding the situation:

What's the real reason for Jones' demise?

Anyone looking for a smoking gun will be disappointed. Health concerns and misconduct have been ruled out. Beyond that, the Packers have been vague in explaining Jones' departure.

"They're management issues which lingered for a number of months," said Bob Harlan on Wednesday following the Packers board of directors meeting.

"And we felt that they finally had to be dealt with."

Out of respect for Jones' family, Harlan has declined to provide details. That stance has invited wild speculation.

But it can be safely assumed Harlan, who will remain in charge until his successor is hired, and the Packers' executive committee concluded Jones wasn't qualified for the job. The Packers don't have to air Jones' dirty laundry in public in order to send that message.

The search for specifics will continue, but the most important statement already has been made: Jones wasn't good enough to take control of the team.

Why did it take so long to come to that conclusion?

Harlan and Jones worked side by side for nearly 8 years, and Jones was sacked just four days before taking over the organization. At first glance, it smacks of a major oversight on Harlan's part.

It wasn't until last fall, according to Harlan, that concerns about Jones came to light. Even then, Harlan said he wanted to cut Jones some slack.

"I wanted to give him every opportunity to see if the situation wouldn't get better, and we could move forward," Harlan said.

"Unfortunately, that didn't happen."

The two went to war together over the Lambeau Field referendum, so it's plausible Harlan was blind to Jones' flaws. Or, Jones concealed his deficiencies well.

But one's true colors eventually show.

"I had some incidents myself with John, so I knew that a problem existed," Harlan said of events from last fall.

Since then, Harlan said he has no regrets about waiting so long before pulling the plug on Jones.

"I didn't want to jump the gun on it," he said.

"I wanted to make sure I was giving it a full study before I went to the executive committee."

Is it possible Jones could return?

Harlan and at least two executive committee members have said it could happen.

In reality, there's no way Jones will be back.

He had several months to improve his management skills and couldn't pull it off. When you're deemed unfit for a big job, spending some down time on the East Coast won't change a thing. The leave of absence was presumably designed to give both sides time to work out a severance package. Legal considerations aside, Jones has worked his last day in Green Bay.

Is the Packers organization in disarray?

Harlan steadfastly denies it. "We're not in disarray," he said.

"We're very well organized."

The team remains in good hands with Harlan in control. But the future depends on the Packers finding a strong, capable replacement. The sooner that happens, the faster the Jones debacle will be forgotten.

Mike Vandermause is sports editor of the Press-Gazette.

Comment woodbuck27

So what is it?

Too much AXE or not enough Arrid? :)

swede

05-31-2007, 03:21 PM

Iron Mike

05-31-2007, 07:22 PM

I didn't read four pages of thread, but has anyone else noticed that in the off-season Ron Wolf expressed a desire to return to the NFL???

Would he make a good Team President?

MJZiggy

05-31-2007, 07:35 PM

How well versed is he with the business side of the operation?

gureski

06-01-2007, 08:19 AM

Those of you who are aware of the Peter Principle know that one of the elements that make it function is that persons within an organization are always highly competent at every level until they ultimately get promoted to their level of incompetence.

I think it took balls and courage for Harlan to see that Jones, a faithful right hand man, was not the right guy for this job.

In all likelihood Jones will continue to be quite competent at many high-level and high pressure jobs that are a good fit for his personality and skills.

I'm taking a deep breath and thinking that this painful step by Harlan corrected an almost unavoidable error (How do you not give Jones a shot at the job if he had been effective in his prior roles with GB?).

The next problem is to find a new guy that will give Green Bay strong leadership while continuing to give TT total support and committment for the duration of his contract. If we suck in 2008 you can fire Ted and I wouldn't care. But I don't want the new boss to be weak, and I don't want the new boss to get in Ted's way either.

I'm completely the opposite. This shows Harlan's flaws at their worst. This shows the flaws of the team's management structure and the lack of control the board has. You have to realize that in order for this last second save to happen that you speak of, the team had to first put themselves into this situation. They easily could've headed this thing off in a professional manner months and months ago, especially by using the health issue as the excuse for a move. Leaving it til Harlan's final days ....when Harlan's legacy is being plastered all over the media was a blunder of mass proportions. This is a bigger story then it had to be if only because the spotlight had moved onto Harlan and Jones. They do this 3 months ago and this situation doesn't cause the concern that it has caused today.

When Harlan hits....it's a home run. When he misses....it's an ugly thing to watch.

And I'd love to see Ron Wolf rejoin the Packers, even if only short-term, but I don't see it happening. He cant' be far off that mandatory retirement age of 70, himself.

TopHat

06-01-2007, 10:08 AM

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070531/PKR01/705310520/1989

Search to start soon for next chairman/CEO. Process expected to begin next week

In the next few days or weeks, the Green Bay Packers' executive committee will begin an NFL-wide search for the team's next chairman and CEO. Starting next week, the seven-man committee will meet weekly instead of monthly, and its first order of business will be determining what happens with John Jones, who was ousted just before he was to take over as chairman and CEO this week. Jones officially is on administrative leave, but there's little chance he can return to lead the organization after being banished to the sidelines for numerous administrative lapses and serious complaints from a large number of team employees. Knowing it won't bring back Jones, the executive committee will want to find Chairman and CEO Bob Harlan's successor soon. Because of the complexity of NFL labor and economic issues, the executive committee will be looking for an experienced NFL executive to replace him and protect the Packers' interest among a group of powerful owners and a strong players union.
"You can't take a lot of time to teach somebody what the National Football League is all about," Harlan said at his press conference Wednesday after the team's quarterly board-of-directors meeting at its Lambeau Field offices. "You need someone who's got that knowledge and is ready to step in and move forward right away." The Packers aren't commenting on how the executive committee will proceed in the search — the committee appears to want to officially take care of Jones' departure before addressing that subject — but it's a given the search will begin soon, because there's no knowing how long it might take. Harlan has said it could take up to a year, but in reality the Packers will want to finish much sooner — in at least half that time if possible.
All signs say the team closely will look at candidates both from within the organization and with other NFL clubs. Harlan was the first Packers president to come from within the team's administrative staff, rather than a local leader promoted from the executive committee, when he was hired in 1989. The Packers never have hired a chairman from another team. "If someone really has knowledge of the league, I think he's going to have knowledge of what the Green Bay Packers stand for," Harlan said. "I'm not that concerned about (hiring from outside the organization). You've got to have someone who when he lands, he's on his feet and ready to go, because time is vitally important."
There appear to be two candidates in the team's current front office, though age could be a factor for one and possibly both. Andrew Brandt has been managing the Packers' salary cap since 1999, and as vice president of player finance and general counsel since 2001 has accompanied Harlan and Jones to many league meetings. At 46, he's 6 years younger than when Harlan took over as president. Jason Wied, a graduate of Green Bay Premontre High School, joined the Packers in 2000 as corporate counsel and was promoted to vice president of administration in early April. He also is highly regarded within the organization, but at 35 would be especially young for the team's highest-ranking post.
The most obvious candidate from outside the organization is Mike Reinfeldt, who was being groomed as Harlan's successor while serving as a front-office executive with the Packers from 1991 until he took a job with the Seattle Seahawks in 1999. However, the Tennessee Titans just hired Reinfeldt this offseason to run their football operations, and there's a good chance he'll be unwilling to walk away from such an attractive and high-ranking job that he's just begun....In the coming weeks, the executive committee could begin the search by appointing a committee — when Harlan was hired in 1989, the search committee consisted of representatives from the executive committee and the board of directors at large. Peter Platten, the executive committee's secretary, also is head of the team's personnel committee and would be a logical choice to head a search committee....
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________

http://www.roblaasz.com/

...Packers Fans....You have questions about just how many...John Jones screwed [up]and why an elderly man who should be literally sailing off into the sunset now has to handpick yet another handpicked successor to run the Green Bay Packers, fully four days after the whole mess was reported. Do you know anything more than you did Sunday morning? Why do you suppose that isn’t? Don’t expect GBP to tell you anything more. First of all, Bob Harlan’s basically already told you Jones...[screwed] up repeatedly. Second, and understandably, they’re trying to negotiate a severance package with Jones in the quietest possible fashion. They don’t want to be forced to fire the guy, because that would get tied up in lawsuits for years. He does have a disability claim, after all. (On the other hand, they are doing a helluva good imitation of character assassination, naming everything the issue wasn’t.)
But there’s a big executive committee, and a lot of employees, and…a lot of reporters whose professional lives are devoted to covering this team. Why can’t the reporters get enough anonymous quotes to tell us what happened? Are they actually happy with the stories they’re writing? Headline on Mike Vandermause’s column today: “Questions on Jones answered.” The piece does nothing of the kind and actually tries to insult people who have a healthy curiosity about the matter. Vandermause is an incredible mediocrity, of course, but can’t Don Walker of the MJS do better than to continue to simply quote Harlan? Don’t these guys have any sources? I haven’t been this incredulous about the credible coverage of a Wisconsin team since it took The New York Times to report that Don Nelson was about to leave the Bucks. The guy under whose nose that story was scooped—Tom Enlund—still covers the Bucks 20 years later…if that’s the correct verb. I know that being the fan of a team is an exercise in credulity. Covering the team should be anything but that. But it seems in Wisconsin, that’s what we’re doomed to always have.
__________________________________________________ ________________________________________

http://mvn.com/nfl-packers/

Packers show guts by cutting Jones, Harlan shows heart by coming back

As I’m sure you have all heard by now, the Green Bay Packers have parted ways with the heir-apparent to Bob Harlan’s job as Green Bay Packers Chairman of the Board. Team President John Jones was set to take over Harlan’s duties once Harlan retires, which would have been last Wednesday. However, in a move that struck most people as very odd, instead of announcing his successor, Harlan announced that he would stay on with the Packers while Jones takes a leave of absence. The move is puzzling to say the least, and still there has not been much information let out by the Packer organization that allows fans to get a better grasp on the situation. This lack of knowledge has only hurt both the Packers and their fans, as gossip and rumors fill the air instead of cold-hard facts and understanding. While there hasn’t been much information let out, the Packers have hinted at some things, and steered clear away from others.
One of the first things that the Packers announced was that Jones’ leave was not health related. Now we can all turn into conspiracy theorist for the time being and firmly announce that his leave must be health related, because why would the Packers say that it wasn’t when we never would have thought about it otherwise? However this situation is highly unlikely. It is much more likely that the Packers wanted to snuff out any rumors that health was an issue, and also to say, in the most roundanout way of course, that there is something else going on here. Then it became known that there were conflicting managerial styles between Harlan and Jones and Jones and the overall organization. The most common question after someone first hears this statement is obviously, “You mean that Jones worked here for nine years and you never ran into this problem before?”
While fans have all the justification to make this statement, and I whole heartedly agree with it, we need to take a closer look at Jones and his relationship with the Packers. Jones has slowly moved his way up in the organization, and was pivotal in passing the referendum for the renovations at Lambeau Field. It can easily be said that without Jones, the Packers do not have the great facilities and atrium that they have today. So why the sudden change of heart on the part of Green Bay and Harlan? It is the belief of this one Packer fan that Jones would have ended up doing a major overhaul of personnel and possibly players. When you reach the role of Chairman of the Board in an organization like Green Bay, an organization that is publicly owned, you have reached the top of the ladder. You are as close to becoming the owner as you will ever be.
So why would Jones take over this highly touted position and not put his mark on it? I highly doubt that Jones would have just rode along while the people that Harlan has put in place do their jobs. Jones would have probably shaken up the pot, which could have spelled doom for Green Bay. First and foremost, Jones would have probably gotten rid of Ted Thompson. While this may, and as past comments have shown, would bring cheers and applause from Packer fans across the nation, it would end any hope of the Packers becoming contenders within the next decade. Thompson is here to build a franchise, not stack the deck for one good year to please Brett Favre and Packer fans who want to see Favre leave “on top”. Secondly, an overhaul could just as easily send Favre into retirement. I love Brett Favre, as all of us do, but nothing is certain in today’s world, especially the NFL. While Favre loves the game of football and the Green Bay Packers, he could easily walk away from it all if the situation isn’t right or turns sour. And if Jones is at the helm making moves left and right, who knows where Favre would have ended up in the equation.
But then again, maybe neither of these situations are the reason why Jones will probably no longer be with the Packers. i doubt he will return as Team President, and he and the Packers will probably work out a compensatory deal within the next few weeks. In the meantime, the Packers are now on the search for a replacement to the replacement. Harlan says the Packers are on the move, and are not looking back. The Packers say that they are not panicking about the situation, but do not which to fall behind. They want to move quickly and find a replacement who will work for the franchise. This seems rather contradictory, as Harlan and the Packers are not panicking, yet want to move as quickly as possible and do not want to fall behind. Overall, there is still much to come out about Jones and the Packers. The sooner that information is let out, the better. Considering the Green Bay Packers are a publicly owned franchise, the Packer organization has been very private about this matter, and need to let the public know what happened and what the future holds for the Green and Gold.
__________________________________________________ ________________________________________

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=648131&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f 648131.html

Sydney Speaks! A franchise in turmoil. PackerReport.com’s Harry Sydney offers his opinion on the state of the Packers, and points out exactly where front office mistakes began to snowball. Front office mistakes go back to Holmgren era.

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=647963&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f 647963.html

How about a better explanation? Packers fans deserve to know 'the' reason for Jones' dismissal.

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=647940&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f 647940.html

Democratic process has its flaws. PackerReport.com's Matt Tevsh offers an insightful look at how the Green Bay Packers operate and his thoughts on why John Jones was denied an opportunity to be the organization's chief executive officer. Was Jones too much of an ‘outside the box’ thinker for Packers?

TopHat

06-02-2007, 03:41 PM

http://packerfansunited.blogspot.com/

Harlan on Jones

It has been a somewhat quiet week in Packerland, other than the Board meeting on Wednesday to discuss the situation with President John Jones, his leave of absence, and making the necessary arrangements to keep CEO Bob Harlan in place despite the team's mandatory age 70 retirement rule. Harlan spoke at a news conference on Wednesday and indicated that he personally had seen possible management problems emerge with Jones last fall, but wanted to wait to see if they were resolved with time. They weren't. And other staff members came to Harlan with their concerns, as well. It was at this point that Harlan -- before stepping down as CEO and turning the reigns of the team over to his hand-picked successor, Jones -- decided he must tell the executive committee of the problem. It was then that the executive committee, acting on behalf of the full board of directors, placed Jones on leave. The full board unanimously affirmed the executive committee's decision on Wednesday.
It is still unclear as to exactly what these "management" problems and concerns were. The team made it clear, however, that there were no issues with personal conduct or ethics. What, then? According to an article in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: "Packers officials have not detailed what Jones did as a team executive that would have caused him to fall from favor. An NFL source has said that questions surfaced on Jones' ability to manage the franchise." That sure narrows it down, doesn't it?
What will become of Jones? Although it is possible he could return to the team it certainly would not be as CEO and might not even be as President. And whether he would want to or not after such a curious and public "leave" action remains to be seen. Look instead to other candidates arising for the positions. Expect the Packers to take their time, too. With Harlan remaining on, there is no rush to fill a job slot. The Packers will want someone with solid NFL experience and in particular an appreciation for what makes the Packers the Packers, and what will keep the team economincally viable; in other words, someone that will fight tooth and nail for continued revenue sharing and salary caps.

TopHat

06-03-2007, 04:12 AM

http://www.nola.com/sports/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-31/1180853455297430.xml&coll=1

Packers' decision about Jones mysterious

What the hell's going on out here?" Those immortal words uttered by the late Vince Lombardi some four decades ago seem to capture the recent turn of events in the front office of the Green Bay Packers' organization. Just when it appeared Bob Harlan was poised to turn the storied franchise over to his hand-picked successor, Packers President John Jones, there appears to be trouble in paradise. Jones, a native of New Orleans and former Times-Picayune sports writer, has taken an indefinite leave of absence. He was expected to become the team's chairman and chief executive officer Wednesday, seven years after being brought to Green Bay to be groomed to replace Harlan. Instead, Harlan, who had planned to retire this month at age 70, will remain in charge until the team's executive committee decides the next course of action. Jones, 55, has three years remaining on his contract. He has not been reached for comment. Harlan and Peter Platten, secretary of the executive committee, provided few clues for the team's sudden change of heart, saying...there were "management issues" and "management concerns." Jones underwent open-heart surgery in June 2006, but Harlan said Jones' health had nothing to do with the team's 11th-hour decision. Harlan said more than one person questioned Jones' ability to manage. "In the past three weeks it became very prominent," said Harlan, who reported those concerns to the executive committee. "It's been very difficult. Out of respect for John and his family, I don't want to say much more."

Harlan did not rule out the possibility Jones could return to the franchise at some point and assume control. One Packers insider said that was highly unlikely. "Basically, it comes down to they don't see JJ as the right man for the job," the source said. Jones seemed to be the right man for the job after working alongside Harlan on the successful and costly renovation of Lambeau Field. The two proved to be an effective tag team with state legislators in Wisconsin and local politicians in Green Bay. Yet, at least one observer didn't seem surprised by the news. "My perception is that there was a culture shock there," said Paul Jadin, former mayor of Green Bay and current 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. Bob was nurturing. He saw the Packers as an extension of his family. John, a little less so." If Jones does not return to power, Green Bay officials might turn to Mike Reinfeldt, a former Packers employee and general manager of the Tennessee Titans, or Packers vice president of finance, Andrew Brandt. Who knows? Maybe aging quarterback Brett Favre might consider retirement to lead the Packers.
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________

http://greenbaypressgazette.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070602/PKR01/70602037/1989

Fans not sure what to make of Packers' turmoil

Katheryn Foxx, a Green Bay native living in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, stood in the Lambeau Field parking lot on Thursday and looked toward the Green Bay Packers’ corporate offices. “They’re being vague,” she said. “It makes me think there’s trouble in upper management.” No trouble. No disorganization. No reason for fans, stockholders or anyone touched by the long arms of the Packers franchise to be concerned, say the men and women who control the administrative functions of the corporation. “Our bench strength is very, very good,” corporation secretary Peter Platten III said six days after he announced that team president John Jones is taking a leave of absence, a move everyone connected with the team assumes will end his association with the Packers. “I don’t call it a setback. It’s a situation. The company will continue. We had to do what we had to do when we had to do it....”
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________

http://greenbaypressgazette.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070602/PKR01/70602013/1989

Packers seek CEO: What's needed? Who fills bill?

The Green Bay Packers are in the midst of one of the messiest transfers of power in their 89-year history. The ouster of John Jones only four days before he was to take over as team chairman and chief executive officer — after almost eight years of grooming for the jobs — will go down as an embarrassing episode in the team’s administrative history. But whatever the temporary black marks from the past week, there will be no shortage of candidates around the NFL coveting the chance to succeed Bob Harlan as the top man for one of the most storied and most loved teams in professional sports. Ken Herock, who’s retired after a long career as a high-ranking NFL executive, left the Packers on bad terms when Harlan passed him over for general manager in 2001. But he still considers being the Packers’ chairman and CEO as perhaps the plum job of the NFL. “You’re running one of the prestigious organizations in the country and No. 1 in football, probably,” Herock said. “That guy keeps the organization together. That guy’s your owner. This is the guy you look to when everything’s failing.”
Just how important is the chairman to the product fans see on the field? Seattle Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren, who coached the Packers from 1992 to 1998, said Harlan played a critical if quiet role in the Packers’ resurgence of the 1990s. Holmgren, GM Ron Wolf, quarterback Brett Favre and defensive end Reggie White were the key football figures in the team’s two Super Bowl appearances in the ‘90s, but Harlan set up a support system that had only one mission: helping the football department. “That doesn’t happen all the time,” said Holmgren, who’s coached in the NFL since 1986. “When you ask how important the president is, when I was there I didn’t see Bob a lot. But when I saw him, if I needed something, I went down there, his door was open, we could always talk, and I always knew that he would do anything in his power to help me be successful there. There was never a doubt in my mind. That’s the importance of that position there.”
Harlan and the executive committee haven’t determined how they’ll conduct the search for his replacement, though they’ll likely form a search committee and perhaps hire a head-hunting firm to compile a short list of candidates. They also will have to prioritize what qualities they want in Harlan’s successor. In his press conference after the team’s quarterly board meeting last week, Harlan emphasized vast experience working in management for an NFL team, detailed knowledge of the NFL’s financial system, and strong relationships with both other league owners and the NFL’s office. That eliminates executives from other sports or businesses, and from the NFL office. There no doubt will be varied opinions among executive committee members and team directors on what other qualifications the Packers should seek in their next chairman. Some might think, as Holmgren does, that knowing the organization and community is crucial.
“The pressure on the person running the team or coaching the team is a little different (in Green Bay) because of how much the team means to the community,” he said. “Every (team) has their fans, but it’s different there, and people that haven’t experienced that, they think they know but they really don’t know.” Herock, on the other hand, emphasized finding a proven, charismatic leader. “A guy that has good communication skills, communicates with people throughout the league, throughout the city,” he said. “Because that’s what your job is.”
Regardless, there are some candidates that don’t take a search committee to identify. One is Mike Reinfeldt, the former Packers executive who was groomed as Harlan’s successor until he joined Holmgren with the Seahawks in 1999. However, Reinfeldt just took a plum job as the Tennessee Titans’ head of football operations over the winter. Though his ties to the Packers are strong, there are major questions whether he’d be willing to leave a job he just started, and if he were, whether Titans owner Bud Adams would allow the move. Reinfeldt is many ways is an ideal candidate. He has strong state and local connections. He went to high school in Baraboo, played college football at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, worked for the Packers from 1991 to 1999 and married a woman from the Green Bay area who still has lots of family here. He also has long and varied experience as an administrator in the NFL and is well known in league circles. He was the Packers’ chief financial officer from 1991 to 1993 — he played a key role in the hiring of Wolf as GM — and vice president of administration from 1994 to 1998. Before going to Tennessee he was a senior vice president with the Seahawks.
“I think he’d probably be the perfect guy,” Holmgren said. “But the problem is, he just got a job.” Reinfeldt’s weakness is his public relations skills — he’s appeared uncomfortable dealing with the media and the public — though current and former members of the Packers’ board who champion his cause think he can grow into that role. “Mike’s not a real communicator,” Herock said. “He’s shy.” Another potential concern for the executive committee could be Reinfeldt’s close friendship with Packers GM Ted Thompson. The two were teammates with the Houston Oilers in the 1970s, and Reinfeldt helped Thompson get his first NFL scouting job, with the Packers in 1992. They also worked together in Seattle’s front office. The executive committee might question whether Reinfeldt would be able to fire Thompson in a timely manner if the GM falters in his attempt to rebuild the football team.
Herock, in the meantime, identified his top three candidates for the job: Holmgren, Tampa Bay GM Bruce Allen, and Rich McKay, who is Atlanta’s president and GM. When told he topped Herock’s list, the 58-year-old Holmgren laughed and scoffed at the notion. However, Herock was adamant that Holmgren, who used to be co-chairman of the NFL’s prestigious competition committee, would make an excellent — if unconventional and long-shot — candidate. “If he wanted to get out of coaching, he’s perfect for that job,” Herock said. “He has great, great character. Mike would be ideal for that job. When he’s with people, they fall in love with him. He’s a great communicator. He knows everything that’s going on. It would be like hiring a Bill Walsh to that position.” Allen, the son of former NFL coach George Allen, has name recognition and a resume that includes 13 years as a front-office executive with Oakland (1995-2003) and the Buccaneers (2004 to the present).
McKay, the son of former Tampa Bay coach John McKay, has been running the Falcons’ football operations for the last three years and was Tampa Bay’s GM from 1995 to 2004. He’s been co-chairman of the competition committee since 1998 and was rumored as a possible candidate for NFL commissioner earlier this year. However, McKay is well known in league circles for loving warm weather and might not be willing to move to a northern city that has harsh winters. The Packers’ front office has two well-regarded vice presidents who could be candidates, though it’s unclear how much support either has with the executive committee. They are Andrew Brandt, 46, who is vice president of player finance and general counsel, and Jason Wied, 35, who is vice president of administration and corporate counsel. Harlan’s eventual replacement will have a unique position in the major professional sports in the United States because of the team’s ownership structure. It’s a public corporation that has 111,967 shareholders who receive no dividends and is run by an executive committee that is elected by the board of directors. The chairman runs the Packers by leading the executive committee and representing the organization in all NFL matters. He’s a de facto member of one of the most exclusive clubs in America — the NFL owners — even though he hasn’t put up a penny of his own money into the team. The chairman is the Packers’ strongest tie to the community because of his working relationship with the board of directors, businesses and charities statewide, and his interactions with fans.
Those relationships are more important for the Packers than for most other major sports teams because public ownership has allowed them to remain in Green Bay while other teams gravitated to larger cities over the years. The chairman also sets the tone for the organization by establishing the goals and working atmosphere in all operations, and determining the autonomy of the football department. Harlan’s decision in late 1991 to cede total control of football operations to the GM has made the Packers one of the NFL’s most attractive teams for scouts and coaches.

woodbuck27

06-04-2007, 02:10 PM

http://www.packersnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070603/GPG0101/706030665/1989

Posted June 3, 2007

Packers say franchise is still strong at the top

Questions linger after Jones' departure

By Tony Walter
twalter@greenbaypressgazette.com

Katheryn Foxx, a Green Bay native living in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, stood in the Lambeau Field parking lot on Thursday and looked toward the Green Bay Packers' corporate offices.

"They're being vague," she said. "It makes me think there's trouble in upper management."

No trouble. No disorganization. No reason for fans, stockholders or anyone touched by the long arms of the Packers franchise to be concerned, say the men and women who control the administrative functions of the corporation.

"Our bench strength is very, very good," corporation secretary Peter Platten III said six days after he announced that team president John Jones is taking a leave of absence, a move everyone connected with the team assumes will end his association with the Packers.

"I don't call it a setback. It's a situation. The company will continue. We had to do what we had to do when we had to do it."

What they did was set in motion a public discussion of the non-football side of the Green Bay Packers just as fans were simmering down from the highly publicized Brett Favre-Randy Moss-Ted Thompson frenzy.

The specific reasons for Jones' departure remain an untouchable topic for Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Bob Harlan and members of the team's executive committee and board of directors.

Jones did not return repeated calls from the Green Bay Press-Gazette.

But two days after the team's board of directors unanimously accepted the explanation for Jones' leave-taking and agreed to extend Harlan's tenure, team officials took steps to reassure Packers Nation that the administrative and financial state of the corporation is steady.

"The Packers corporation right now is in the best financial position it has ever been," said Larry Weyers, president of Integrys Energy Group and treasurer of the Packers' executive committee.

"You're going to see a continuation of our success" when the team reveals its annual financial report later this month.

While direct feedback from fans has been minimal — Harlan said he hasn't received a single piece of communication about the Jones situation — fans are watching the off-field activities of the corporation.

"One thing that concerns me is that we don't know what happened," said Joe Golson of Little Chute. "But I have too much confidence in management and think things will be as good as ever."

But for some, there is discontent.

"Aren't the Packers accountable to their shareholders and the city of Green Bay, the owners of the Packers?" wrote Roger Chemel, a Green Bay native living in Olympia, Wash.

"Apparently not."

"I find it incredible that a multimillion-dollar organization can have an employee for eight or nine years 'training' for the lead job and find out in the ninth inning that he is 'not a fit managerially' for the organization," wrote Ron Opicka of Casco.

"We should all send them another donation like the one they are taxing us for now."

For others, there is acceptance.

"Harlan has the team's best interest at heart, both long-term and short-term. We'll have enough adjustments to deal with in the post-Favre era, and we don't need 'management issues' at the top to complicate matters in the interim," wrote David Bossard of Fairmont, W.Va.

"(Harlan) could have 'calmed down' the employees who questioned Jones' leadership and rode quietly into the sunset," wrote John Burgoyne of Weatherford, Texas. "He didn't. He took a courageous action that he knew would reflect directly on him and raise all kinds of questions."

There also is indifference, perhaps.

"I'm not so sure this is that big a story to a majority of Packer fans," said St. Norbert College economics professor Kevin Quinn, who has written extensively about the impact of professional sports.

"It's water-cooler talk so far. People are talking more about what Lindsay Lohan is doing. But I think it's also because the fan base doesn't know Jones like it knows Harlan or (Ron) Wolf. This is something to talk about when the draft is distantly behind us and the opening of training camp is several weeks away."

Weyers said the Packers are structured so "no one is irreplaceable. It might get a little stressful but we're set up to handle it."

The set-up changed dramatically a year ago when Jones had heart surgery and was away from work for an extended time. Harlan asked corporate counsel Jason Wied and director of finance Vicki Vannieuwenhoven to take on many of Jones' duties in his absence.

Then, in April, Jones promoted both Wied and Vannieuwenhoven to vice president. They, and executive vice president and General Manager Ted Thompson alone report directly to Harlan until a new president is named. Wied and Vannieuwenhoven also will attend many league meetings and all executive committee meetings, signifying their growing stature within the corporation.

Platten said the function of the executive committee, which makes corporate decisions when the 46-member board of directors is not in session, changed after Lambeau Field was renovated as it became evident that more staff would be required to meet the demands of what became a major tourist attraction.

He also said Harlan's decision to develop a committee structure within the executive committee was pivotal in shaping a more corporate style of management.

"Our role is oversight and advisory," Platten said. "It wasn't always that way. There was a time when Ole (former team president Dominic Olejniczak) and Fred Trowbridge ran the place, but there has been a slow evolution to this."

While Weyers acknowledged the need for a corporate model for the franchise, he added, "We can never forget that what we are about is football."

woodbuck27

06-04-2007, 02:47 PM

Story Chat

Reader Comment Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:14 am

Jones was Critical OF TT and his attempt to rebuild the packers , The reason why this fact isnt more known is because Harlan doesnt want to Add more fuel to the Fire which is the TT situation . Thompson has Harlans Ear and Went to him , Fortunately for Thompson , Jones was the one to go .... For the Time being it is business as usual . This season is critical . IF the packers Flame out , Then there will be a complete shake up in 2008 ,

Taking out everyone including TT .

Must Reading for ALL Packer Fans Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:03 am

Every packer fan needs to read Rick 0107's comment as it is probably THE most intelligent post I've read on this forum. Stock holders of any corpaoration are never given all the details of personel problems, and they all get to express their feelings of how to run the corporation with one vote per share of stock for the board members they want to represent them. The Packers Corporation has acted according to good management practices in the handling of this situation, and in the end things will be alright.

Rick 0107--keep posting!! You seem to be one of the few with your head on straight.

Foul Ball Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:50 am

Most people in business know that the best way to resolve problems is to:

1) identify, 2) correct 3) contain. The primary rule of thumb is never let your problems get out the door to the customer (read: fans).

As far the personnel issues, most business people know that there are significant ramifications to disclosing personnel issues in a public forum.

Even those of us who own stock - in the Packers or elsewhere - are never privy to the specific reasons behind personnel matters. When was the last time any of us sent a request to the board of directors for anything but an annual stock report. C'mon Packer Fans, we are smarter than that!

I applaud the Packers for keeping personnel issues where they belong - behind close doors. We know all we need to know.

GO PACK!!!