John Jones , is taking a leave.

[packinpatland]

Doesn't sound like 'health issues'.

[Bretsky]

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

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

No clue if true or not

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

[GrnBay007]

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

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

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

[packinpatland]

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


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

[Joemailman]

007,

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

[mraynrand]

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

Ron Wolf?

[packinpatland]

007,

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

Oh God, what did he and TT do?

[GrnBay007]

007,

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

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

[Kiwon]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Kiwon]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.

[GrnBay007]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.

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

[Kiwon]

Using a Lady Derringer, of course.

[Rastak]

Colonel Mustard in the Billiard Room with the Rope.

I have the Billiard room.

[packinpatland]

The Packers need better PR people.

[Rastak]

Profootballtalk.com's take:


JONES OUT AS PACKERS' NEXT CEO

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

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

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

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

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

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

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