NFL 2022 Offseason, Draft, Free Agency

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Danny

Lions making these franchises look like chumps. They've been able to tank for all these years without paying anyone an extra dime

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

But I also wonder why someone like Bienemy or Leftwich don't have head coaching jobs right now.

As of early 2021, Bienemy had never been the primary playcaller. And Leftwich has, I think, 2 seasons.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by rjolley

Like Marcus Spears said yesterday, and I'm sure others have said before, the problem isn't the Rooney Rule. The problem is that it exists. That owners think that the best candidate has to be of a certain race, like that automatically makes them a good leader and coach or GM. Until that mindset starts to adjust, any rule put into place will have issues.

And the comparisons with how Tomlin, Smith, and other Black coaches have done misses the point too. Just because a Black coach has done well doesn't mean others can do well. It means that people with his experience can do well. If a coordinator who has 10-15 years of experience, is organized, and is a proven teacher has proven to be a good head coach, then those types of qualifications should be considered at regardless of race.

Would love to see the process move towards that.

Tomlin was a 34-year old that had one-year experience as an NFL coordinator and four-years as a position coach. He had the opportunity to interview and blew them away and Whisenhunt ended up with another HC job in Arizona. Lovie had only been a coordinator for three seasons and was in his early 40's. I would imagine Raheem Morris in Tampa Bay must have been another guy that 'wowed' management in interviews, because he had very limited experience as a coordinator and was like 32-years old.

Some guys just have the "it" factor, are dynamic personalities, and interview well. Successful white coaches like McVay, Vrabel, LaFleur, Zac Taylor, and a bunch of other guys had less than 3 or 4 years as coordinators in the NFL and were hired at young ages, but have all seemed well equipped as head coaches. That suggests, to me, that experience is actually not that high on the list of characteristics that make for a successful HC in the NFL.

I don't know what the answer is, but it doesn't make sense that a league with more than 50% black players only has one black head coach. It's hard for me to think it is not a matter of access to those folks and that a lot of that is simply that ex-players have had fewer opportunities to get into coaching and coordinator roles and/or are given fewer interviews. I do think the Rooney Rule has probably helped some (I'm not sure how it could have hurt with access, at least) and has opened some doors.

[Swaggs]

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

In the NFL (less so MLB) you'd incentivize teams to lose games the last weekend & miss the playoffs. The MLB/NHL/NBA proposal I like is setting it by the number of wins after a team is eliminated from playoff contention, though a lottery probably still makes sense in the NBA at least. And a lottery is the best answer I can think of for the NFL.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

As of early 2021, Bienemy had never been the primary playcaller. And Leftwich has, I think, 2 seasons.

Matt Nagy and Zac Taylor called only a handful of games. LaFleur and Stefanski had one season of primary playcalling. Arthur Smith had two. Kingsbury and Campbell never called plays at the NFL level from what I can tell.

It doesn't seem like having a long run as a coordinator matters much.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

MLB is unique because a player you draft is likely not going to help you for many years. I always found it weird they did the draft order by the previous season. Like "you sucked last year so now you get to pick a player who will help you in 5 years".

I'd be fine if MLB just did a full lottery where every single team has a ping pong ball.

Still, money is the biggest motivator. If they truly care about teams trying (which they don't), they would just give the teams that win the biggest checks in the end. No reason why the Chicago Bears should be sharing playoff media revenues with the Kansas City Chiefs.

[molson]

I've never seen the problem with a decent not terrible team ending up with a top draft pick. I know there's no obvious top QB coming out of college this year, but if there was, and a team like the Vikings or or Browns had that top pick, that's be pretty compelling. And I don't think a really bad team like the Jaguars is just doomed forever unless they get the #1 pick instead of #15 or whatever. They might just have to rely on some good team building besides just sucking and picking first. Other teams have managed to improve without drafting first. Trevor Lawrence going to the Broncos or Panthers would have been just fine for the NFL (and pretty great for Lawrence). If it made things a little harder for the Jaguars, tough shit, they don't deserve more just because they suck. Same in the NBA.

[RainMaker]

I also wonder if it would be better for the league if we didn't stick the most talented players out of college on the most incompetently run teams. Trevor Lawrence is one of the most touted college QBs we've seen come out in some time and he's going to have to rot away in Jacksonville for the next half decade.

[miami_fan]

I had not looked at the Rooney Rule in years so I decided to take a gander. I have a couple questions about parts of the rule that maybe someone knows the answers to.

Clubs must interview at least two diverse candidates from the Career Development Advisory Panel list, or a diverse candidate not currently employed by the club.

The Career Development Panel was disbanded by the league in 2020 so I suggest the NFL update its website. The NFL creates its own list now. How do they come up with the list? What qualifies someone to be on that list?

Clubs must maintain complete records and provide them to the league upon the Commissioner’s request.

What are the records that clubs must maintain? Are these interview records? Has the Commissioner requested any of these records?

[RainMaker]

Didn't see this coming.

Jim Harbaugh called Michigan to inform the school that, despite interviewing with the Vikings today, he will be returning to school for the 2022 season, sources tell ESPN. Michigan was, in the words of one source, “elated” to get Harbaugh’s decision.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) February 3, 2022

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Didn't see this coming.

Jim Harbaugh called Michigan to inform the school that, despite interviewing with the Vikings today, he will be returning to school for the 2022 season, sources tell ESPN. Michigan was, in the words of one source, “elated” to get Harbaugh’s decision.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) February 3, 2022

Ohio State also elated.

[albionmoonlight]

Report: Unnamed witness heard Stephen Ross offer Brian Flores $100,000 per loss - ProFootballTalk

NFL Network reporting that a witness heard Ross offer Flores money to lose. I do not think the NFL network runs any story that the NFL does not want run. The NFL has decided that Ross is more trouble than he’s worth. They will force him to sell the team, completely solving both racism and gambling corruption in one fell swoop. Nothing to see here. Season tickets go on sale next month.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

I don't like it nearly as much for the MLB because of the lack of a salary cap. But, yeah, the whole "player won't be ready for 5 years" thing factors into that, too.

SI

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Report: Unnamed witness heard Stephen Ross offer Brian Flores $100,000 per loss - ProFootballTalk

NFL Network reporting that a witness heard Ross offer Flores money to lose. I do not think the NFL network runs any story that the NFL does not want run. The NFL has decided that Ross is more trouble than he’s worth. They will force him to sell the team, completely solving both racism and gambling corruption in one fell swoop. Nothing to see here. Season tickets go on sale next month.

How would this resolve any perceived racism issues? Flores was hired under Ross so you can't really accuse him of being unwilling to hire a minority coach. Despite other flaws.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

I love this idea as it means the Colts would get the #3 pick.


Oh wait...we got Carson Wentz instead.

[stevew]

I don't think anyone had to pay Hue Jackson to lose games.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

How would this resolve any perceived racism issues? Flores was hired under Ross so you can't really accuse him of being unwilling to hire a minority coach. Despite other flaws.

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. My point is that the NFL will fire Ross and then declare every problem solved.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. My point is that the NFL will fire Ross and then declare every problem solved.

Sorry, that post went over my head.

[Coffee Warlord]

There's rumblings of Nagy being under consideration for the Lions OC job.

As a Bears fan, I thoroughly endorse this.

[bhlloy]

The tanking discussion is a slippery slope I think. There are clearly teams that are tanking, more commonly in other leagues than the NFL even where they've put the draft lottery in place to try to discourage it.

The distinction I think there is that the players and coaches are still trying to win for the most part. Yes, the talent disparity might be there due to the GMs stripping the roster but in general the players are going out there to put in an honest effort. To me a coach (or players) being told to lose games or financially incentivized to do so is on a different level to that, and from that it's a slippery slope that really makes mockery of the sport on a number of levels, and you do start to get serious questions about people who are betting on the games or the fans who have spent money to follow the team. It just feels a million times worse to me, and I think Ross probably is in hot water if Flores can prove any of this.

[Carman Bulldog]

So the NFL Rulebook has these little doohickeys in it...

SECTION 2
EXTRAORDINARILY UNFAIR ACTS
ARTICLE 1.COMMISSIONER AUTHORITY.

The Commissioner has the sole authority to investigate and take appropriate disciplinary and/or corrective measures if any club action, non-participant interference, or calamity occurs in an NFL game which the Commissioner deems so extraordinarily unfair or outside the accepted tactics encountered in professional football that such action has a major effect on the result of the game.

ARTICLE 3.PENALTIES FOR UNFAIR ACTS.
The Commissioner’s powers under this Section 2 include the imposition of monetary fines and draft-choice forfeitures...

I think one could make the case that the club actions are outside the accepted tactics and that the Dolphins could be subject to fines and or draft pick forfeitures. To me, that seems the most likely outcome.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

This would just make so much sense. It'll never pass for that reason. This should be the standard rule to prevent this tanking BS.

[flere-imsaho]

Make the draft completely RNG (for the first round), except the four teams who make the conference championships, who pick 28-32 based on current placing rules.

[albionmoonlight]

This is way too radical, I know, but I've liked the Wheel concept ever since I read about it:

» The NBA’s Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

A 32-year cycle in which every team gets every draft slot once. It would be fair. It would give no incentive to tank. And it could even stimulate trades b/c teams would know exactly what picks would be part of trade packages.

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The MLB has apparently been talking about incentivizing competition by potentially setting the draft order in reverse from the teams that came closest to making the playoffs. I'm a Pirates fan and it would definitely hurt my team most years, but I like that idea for MLB and the NFL. Let the last teams eliminated have the top pick and get the most impactful players.

This just creates the Haves and the Have-Nots IMO. So, you put Joe Burrow on the -- and I didn't check this thoroughly, it's just a rough example -- Eagles and Chase Young on the Raiders? What are the Bengals, Redskins, and Lions supposed to do to turn it around?

[JPhillips]

You can't have a system that incentivizes just missing the playoffs. What would the Steelers have done, for example, if there was a Joe Burrow-like player available in the draft?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Bobble

This just creates the Haves and the Have-Nots IMO. So, you put Joe Burrow on the -- and I didn't check this thoroughly, it's just a rough example -- Eagles and Chase Young on the Raiders? What are the Bengals, Redskins, and Lions supposed to do to turn it around?

Yeah, this solution is from the point of view that tanking is way more prevalent than just sucking. The Lions and other historically bad teams could use an executive (or owner) draft which would help way more than this.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Bobble

This just creates the Haves and the Have-Nots IMO. So, you put Joe Burrow on the -- and I didn't check this thoroughly, it's just a rough example -- Eagles and Chase Young on the Raiders? What are the Bengals, Redskins, and Lions supposed to do to turn it around?

They shouldn't have any less chance of getting high picks than the Eagles or Raiders. But if getting the #1 pick is the only way those teams can ever win (which I don't think is true at all), and the league continues to award structural advantages for being bad, then nobody should complain if teams try to lose, or offer coaches money to lose, or more simply, just not show up for games in the future and forfeit. That should be a legitimate means of how teams operate and hire and reward coaches if those teams. It just would have to happen out in the open.

The league survives and thrives just fine if OK franchises get the best college players some of the time. If some teams are just inferior forever if they're treated the same as everyone else, that's their problem. Maybe the Lions should just get the first two or three picks every year until they win a playoff game if that's just a critical thing, if they need that advantage to do that and everybody decides its just so unfair to them that they've run their own team into the ground for 6 decades.

[spleen1015]

I think they should keep the salary cap in place and let college players enter FA right out of college.

European soccer doesn't have a draft and it is doing just fine.

I also think teams should make more money the higher the finish in the standings if you're worried about tanking.

You can't be worried about being fair with acquiring players and also be worried about tanking as we've seen.

[molson]

Obviously the players would love to abolish the draft, and I'm not sure how much value it has for the NFL anymore when there's a salary cap.

The draft is entertaining, and I think it helps fandom that we have this simple and transparent way to evaluate how teams acquire rookie players (it's fun to know what teams passed up which players, and so forth), but I don't know if that outweighs the drawbacks.

Getting exclusive rights to any player you want in all of college is such a massive reward, that you have to lose a lot games to earn. When the major sports leagues started drafts they were all getting drunk in hotel ballrooms and picking people they've never seen play from lists. It's not quite an exact science yet, but it's moving more in that direction all the time.

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by molson

They shouldn't have any less chance of getting high picks than the Eagles or Raiders. But if getting the #1 pick is the only way those teams can ever win (which I don't think is true at all), and the league continues to award structural advantages for being bad, then nobody should complain if teams try to lose, or offer coaches money to lose, or more simply, just not show up for games in the future and forfeit. That should be a legitimate means of how teams operate and hire and reward coaches if those teams. It just would have to happen out in the open.

The league survives and thrives just fine if OK franchises get the best college players some of the time. If some teams are just inferior forever if they're treated the same as everyone else, that's their problem. Maybe the Lions should just get the first two or three picks every year until they win a playoff game if that's just a critical thing, if they need that advantage to do that and everybody decides its just so unfair to them that they've run their own team into the ground for 6 decades.

I can't see the solution being to put game-changing players like Peyton Manning and Joe Burrow on an 8-8 team (or 9-8 these days) and telling cities at 4-13 good luck turning it around with Paxton Lynch or Johnny Manziel.

edit: As well as the 24th best choice in every other round as well...

[NobodyHere]

They're saying 36 yr old Rams OC Kevin O' Connell is going to be the next Vikings head coach.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

I've never seen the problem with a decent not terrible team ending up with a top draft pick. I know there's no obvious top QB coming out of college this year, but if there was, and a team like the Vikings or or Browns had that top pick, that's be pretty compelling. And I don't think a really bad team like the Jaguars is just doomed forever unless they get the #1 pick instead of #15 or whatever. They might just have to rely on some good team building besides just sucking and picking first. Other teams have managed to improve without drafting first. Trevor Lawrence going to the Broncos or Panthers would have been just fine for the NFL (and pretty great for Lawrence). If it made things a little harder for the Jaguars, tough shit, they don't deserve more just because they suck. Same in the NBA.

Woah woah woah... just because the Jaguars are a complete dumpster fire let's not assume Trevor Lawrence would be any better if he had been drafted by the Panthers!

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I also wonder if it would be better for the league if we didn't stick the most talented players out of college on the most incompetently run teams. Trevor Lawrence is one of the most touted college QBs we've seen come out in some time and he's going to have to rot away in Jacksonville for the next half decade.

On the flip side Joe Burrow wasn't one of the most hyped prospects but Cincy is in the Super Bowl 18 months after drafting him #1 overall. Jacksonville was also in the AFC CG & people thought the franchise was set up for a decade of dominance 4 seasons ago.

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

This is way too radical, I know, but I've liked the Wheel concept ever since I read about it:

» The NBA’s Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

A 32-year cycle in which every team gets every draft slot once. It would be fair. It would give no incentive to tank. And it could even stimulate trades b/c teams would know exactly what picks would be part of trade packages.

One problem with that idea - do you think the NFL will have 32 teams until 2054?

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I think they should keep the salary cap in place and let college players enter FA right out of college.

Players association would presumably have an issue with new people making a larger slice of the pie than current players.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Bobble

I can't see the solution being to put game-changing players like Peyton Manning and Joe Burrow on an 8-8 team (or 9-8 these days) and telling cities at 4-13 good luck turning it around with Paxton Lynch or Johnny Manziel.

edit: As well as the 24th best choice in every other round as well...

They should have the same chance at the top players as everyone else. Why should the 8-9 teams be penalized with structural disadvantages for winning a few too many games? Especially since the only difference between that 8 win team and 3 win team might be who is more willing to throw games, or pay a high enough bonus with a willing head coach to get that critical reward.

But again, if that's the world the NFL wants, then owners should be allowed to pay coaches to lose games, and teams should be allowed to forfeit or take seasons off to obtain those rewards. It's absurd to require teams to play and try to win games if you're right and the only way the Bengals and other teams can ever win is to have it handed to them on a platter just because they're incompetent.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I think they should keep the salary cap in place and let college players enter FA right out of college.

European soccer doesn't have a draft and it is doing just fine.

I also think teams should make more money the higher the finish in the standings if you're worried about tanking.

You can't be worried about being fair with acquiring players and also be worried about tanking as we've seen.

Soccer works because of relegation. There is a reason for teams and fans at the bottom of the league to get excited about matches. Without relegation and without a reverse order draft the bottom teams' fans have no reason to care about the sport at all.

[Kodos]

Maybe the USFL can become the relegation league for the NFL. Here come the Lions!

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

One problem with that idea - do you think the NFL will have 32 teams until 2054?

Good point. I don't think it is an idea-killing problem. But there would have to be a system in place to handle expansion/contraction.

[molson]

I think for that reason the wheel thing would have to have a shorter lifespan. Like instead of being guaranteed every single different draft position over a 32-year period, maybe you're guaranteed to be in particular small range like 1-2, 17-20, 29-32, once over every 8-10 year period, and then a lottery sorts it out from there.

[bhlloy]

The other problem is that US sports leagues are set up as pyramid schemes for billionaires, in which you can buy into a league that guarantees parity in return for your dollars and equal share of TV rights, and then team values and revenue continue to go up and then you get a nice share of the next sucker to buy in. That’s not something that happens in European soccer, nobody buys Norwich knowing that the value of their investment is intrinsically tied to every other team in the Premiership.

Some of the suggestions in this thread are an absolute non starter for those reasons. NFL and NFL owners would much rather the odd scandal than change the system in any meaningful way that would result in less parity and a chance that misrun teams wouldn’t still be worth a billion dollars.

[larrymcg421]

I like the middle out approach.

The 16th and 17th teams draw for the #1 spot. 15th and 18th draw for the #2 spot. Continues until the worst team and the SB champ draw for the last two spots.

I like it because it disincentivizes tanking and the only way winning "hurts" you is if you're advancing far into the playoffs.

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by molson

They should have the same chance at the top players as everyone else.

Can't agree with that. The worst teams should have the best chance to improve the most. That's how you get parity and give fans of every team a chance to get to the Superbowl. Not to mention the influx of hope every year for what could become of those high picks. Otherwise, you just get EPL where only a few teams have a realistic chance of winning and everyone else is some form of the Washington Generals. If you think you got sick of seeing Brady before...

I don't know how you look at the Bengals and say that the system doesn't work.

You've gotten to be the most popular sport in the country by doing it this way. I don't see messing with that just for this tanking talk. At most, you do a lottery heavily weighted for the worst team.

[NobodyHere]

I say just randomize the draft picks of all non-play teams. There's no incentive to tank and good/elite teams won't be getting a top draft pick.

[molson]

I don't think the federal government cares about things like individual owners rationally taking advantage of league incentives to lose by awarding bonusses, but with the explosion in gambling availability, I think it is a potential concern that bettors have to speculate what teams are trying to win games and which teams aren't, and which participants in those games are being specifically incentivized to influence games to get those benefits.

[JPhillips]

The big problem is the importance of the QB and that isn't going away no matter what you do. Going into the season 23 projected starters were first-round picks, the majority being top ten picks. As long as one position makes such a difference, teams are going to manipulate things as much as possible to ensure success at that position.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I think they should keep the salary cap in place and let college players enter FA right out of college.

European soccer doesn't have a draft and it is doing just fine.

I also think teams should make more money the higher the finish in the standings if you're worried about tanking.

You can't be worried about being fair with acquiring players and also be worried about tanking as we've seen.

In this context, European soccer is not "doing just fine" at all. It's stuck in a "rich get richer" mess. Most of the (old school) big clubs in Europe (read: England, Spain, Italy, Germany, France) are virtually bankrupt, but somehow find ways to hide their lies about their actual bank balance and stay at the top. So, unless somebody brings in oil money and they equally lie about their bank balance to avoid punishment for breaking financial fair play rules, a club can't climb upwards. It's almost impossible to tell which clubs aren't part of the lying circle or actually have a healthy financial situation.

Or in short: it's not the right model to try to mimic if you want a fair way to create/maintain parity.


On the parity scale, even with the Patriots dominating the past 2 decades, I think the NFL is in a very good position concerning how parity is working out.
12 different champions in the last 20 years (and 8 in the last 10 years) is probably the best you can find out there.

In western European soccer the last 20 years:
UEFA Champions' League: 10 different winners, with 4 in the last 10 years.
English Premier League: 6 different winners, with 5 in last 10.
Spanish La Liga: 4 different winners, only 3 in last 10.
Italian Serie A: 3 different winners, only 2 in last 10.
German 1.Bundesliga: 5 different winners, only 2 in last 10.
French Ligue 1: 7 different winners, with 4 in last 10.
Dutch Eredivisie: 5 different winners, only 3 in last 10.

The last one a homer selection, but it's nothing different from the other leagues. The biggest caveat on the national leagues is that variety in 34, 38 or 42 matches is different from the NFL's 16 regular and 3 or 4 playoff games. The Champions' League sample size is even smaller than the NFL's, with 6 regular and 2 + 2 + 2 +1 playoff games.

[molson]

The tanking discussion reminds me of M.L. Carr talking about how his job was to make sure his team played hard, but lost - to the extent of actually benching players who were making too many shots. It is usually not talked about this candidly, but I don't believe this is the only time it's ever happened. The stakes are too big.

For Boston Celtics, tanking is likely necessary, but it's never easy

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Didn't see this coming.

Jim Harbaugh called Michigan to inform the school that, despite interviewing with the Vikings today, he will be returning to school for the 2022 season, sources tell ESPN. Michigan was, in the words of one source, “elated” to get Harbaugh’s decision.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) February 3, 2022

Has anyone seen any more reporting as to why Harbaugh expected to receive a job offer from Minnesota after his interview yesterday?

[Ksyrup]

Is this posturing to make it look like it was Harbaugh's job to decline, or did the Vikings pass on him? Or, mutual decision not to go forward?

[sovereignstar v2]

From the sounds of it not all of the Vikings ownership were on board with Harbaugh and they quite possibly overruled their new GM.