JONES WON'T BE BACK: EXPOSE & PREDICTIONS!

[TopHat]

BONUS: UPDATE

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=647106&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f647106.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!

[woodbuck27]

Re: BONUS: UPDATE

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=61&p=2&c=647106&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2 f%2fpackers.scout.com%2f2%2f647106.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!

Would someone please post this article,if possible.

Thank You.

GO PACKERS !!

[TopHat]

BONUS: UPDATE

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.....

[Fritz]

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]

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.

You tell 'em, ferret face.

[Terry]

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]

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.

[Rastak]

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]

Re: BONUS: UPDATE

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

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]

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]

On the other hand...

...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]

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]

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.

[woodbuck27]

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]

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?