JONES WON'T BE BACK: EXPOSE & PREDICTIONS!

[TopHat]

UPDATE: LATEST

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Iron Mike]

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]

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

[gureski]

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]

UPDATE: LATEST NEWS

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%2f648131.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%2f647963.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%2f647940.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]

WEEKEND: FORTHCOMING SCENARIO

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]

UPDATE: LATEST

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]

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]

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!!!