Something Realistic: Grade the 2003 Packer draft

[Scott Campbell]

Scott,

Bob Harlan did not terminate nor (near as we can tell) advocate firing Mike Sherman. He stated at the time, that the move was made ONLY because he didn't believe one person could do the job.

Do you believe everything you read? It's not Bob Harlan's job to explain to us why he really did it. It is Bob Harlan's job to put the best possible spin on an ugly situation. It is Bob Harlan's job to do and say things that reflect well on the Green Bay Packers. It's not his job to let you and I peer into his thinking process, so he's not about to tell a bunch of reporters if he thought Sherman was completely incompetent for drafting the Beej, or any of the multitude of well documented bonehead personnel moves.

Obviously Sherman wasn't Employee of the Month - or he wouldn't have been fired.

And the Assistant Head Coach title is little more than a glorified equipment manager position. I'm sure it was given to Sherman just to let him save a little face during his demotion period. He's an O-line coach.

[retailguy]

Do you believe everything you read? It's not Bob Harlan's job to explain to us why he really did it. It is Bob Harlan's job to put the best possible spin on an ugly situation. It is Bob Harlan's job to do and say things that reflect well on the Green Bay Packers. It's not his job to let you and I peer into his thinking process, so he's not about to tell a bunch of reporters if he thought Sherman was completely incompetent for drafting the Beej, or any of the multitude of well documented bonehead personnel moves.

Obviously Sherman wasn't Employee of the Month - or he wouldn't have been fired.

And the Assistant Head Coach title is little more than a glorified equipment manager position. I'm sure it was given to Sherman just to let him save a little face during his demotion period. He's an O-line coach.

Scott,

I understand your premise, and while I agree that happens all the time in the NFL, I don't think it applies to Bob Harlan.

Bob Harlan has made a career out of not avoiding the media or not answering questions. He was very thorough about explaining himself related to Mike Sherman. He didn't refuse to answer any questions and said consistently that the change was NOT a reflection on Mike Sherman. Do people lie? Sure, happens all the time. Can Bob Harlan lie in this situation? I doubt it. He has the potential to take calls and make statements to too many people. What other executive publishes his phone number and takes calls from fans? You think we wouldn't notice if he pulled our leg too often? C'mon, if he did that, his phone would be ringing off the hook.

Bob Harlan is no Daniel Snyder. If he says it, he believes it. If he doesn't believe it, he's not going to say it. He is, by all appearances, a TOTAL character guy. He has way too much to lose to not tell the truth.

His job IS to protect the reputation of the Green Bay Packers. Is there a better way to do that then to tell the truth? I don't think so. The downside to "fibbing" about Mike Sherman reflects more poorly on the Green Bay Packers than just being honest and upfront about it. If he'd come out and said that Mike was a good man, but wasn't right for the job and it was his job to fix that, who would have questioned it? Now, lets say he believes that, but didn't say that, and it comes out. How does this protect the reputation of the Green Bay Packers? How does this reflect to the character of Bob Harlan? Neither one works. Your premise doesn't match the man who has been in the public personna for 20 years. Far too long a time to represent him as someone that he is not.

We'll see what happens to Mike Shermans job opportunities after this season. I believe he gets another shot somewhere. We'll see.