Home > Jeff Schultz
Why promote Waddell?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
For the past several weeks, rumors have floated through the offices of the Atlanta Spirit that Don Waddell was about to step into an executive position similar to that of the abruptly departed Bernie Mullin.
This prompted two immediate reactions from most rational, clear-thinking beings close to (or within) the Thrashers and Hawks: 1) Why promote somebody whose only previous position in Atlanta is largely viewed as a colossal failure? 2) Isn’t the aforementioned Mullin position the same job that led owner Michael Gearon to comment: “Even though we set it up originally to have [general managers] reporting to Bernie, that never really happened. We quickly realized we didn’t need a person between us and them.”
So. Pay an executive salary to a failed executive to fill a position that you’ve previously stated really doesn’t need filling. Perfect.
You want things to change.
We all want things to change.
Hey, maybe they are changing — and just nobody wants to admit it yet.
Gearon finally admitted late last week that promoting the Thrashers’ general manager to a high position within the Spirit group was being discussed. He also suggested that help might be brought in before the draft. He stopped short of saying Waddell would be stripped of draft duties. When asked directly if Waddell was definitely going to be the general manager next season, Gearon said he hadn’t thought about titles yet.
Sorry. Not buying it.
A story posted on ESPN.com Friday night reported Waddell already has been asked to give up his GM duties and accept another management position. Gearon refuted the story. Sort of. But in an e-mailed statement to the AJC’s Craig Custance, Gearon never clearly outlined Waddell’s role with the franchise or the company. It closed by saying: “We are focused on finding a coach, and getting ready for the draft and free agency.”
Nobody, not even Gearon, is disputing that the
Thrashers need fixing. Nobody is understating the importance of this draft (the Thrashers have two first round picks) or that the franchise is at a crossroads (they’ve failed to make the playoffs seven out of eight seasons, haven’t developed talent and their lone superstar, Ilya Kovalchuk, is understandably frustrated).
The Spirit owners probably believe firing Waddell doesn’t make them look good, given how long they’ve defended him. So if Waddell has time left on his contract — which has been reported but not confirmed — they could rationalize it doesn’t look as bad if he is kept in the company (albeit somewhat neutered). And Waddell? He still gets a nice office, a big salary and avoids public humiliation, biding his time until a real hockey job opens up.
Regardless, Gearon is doing all he can do to douse this story. He denies anybody in the Spirit has not spoken to any potential general manager candidate. But a Toronto newspaper already has reported that the Thrashers have made preliminary contact with David Nonis, the former Vancouver general manager.
A lot of people sure seem to be making up a lot of stories.
The Spirit never asked me for a game plan. But if Waddell is out, here’s a starter kit:
• 1) Call Brian Burke. He rebuilt Vancouver. He was the architect of Anaheim’s Stanley Cup. He recently flirted with Toronto, then said he’s returning to the Ducks for another year. But the plans seem murky. (Interesting history: Burke was a finalist for the Thrashers’ job in 1998. He desperately wanted it. But former team president Harvey Schiller was twiddling his thumbs on a decision, and Burke felt compelled to take the only offer on the table — from Vancouver.)
• 2) If Burke says no, phone Scotty Bowman. Offer him the world. If he says no, pay him to draw up a blueprint and suggest candidates.
• 3) 0-for-2? Contract any assistant general manager or personnel director from a franchise with a history of finding and developing talent: Detroit, Minnesota, Montreal, Buffalo, New Jersey, San Jose, Ottawa.
Here’s what you don’t do: Nothing.
Gearon’s statement included this gem: “Don is very highly respected in Atlanta, in NHL circles, and certainly among our ownership group.”
I’d like to see his polling numbers in Atlanta and NHL circles. Eight seasons of numbers don’t support that.
Permalink | Comments (37) | Post your comment | Categories: Thrashers/NHL
Defining offseason awaits Atlanta Spirit
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In the four years since taking ownership of the Hawks and Thrashers, the Atlanta Spirit too often has stumbled into implausible scenarios, like executive slapstick, only to work hard at convincing everybody that its days as a punch line were ending.
Unfortunately, as these owners have found, it’s difficult to make a convincing argument after you introduce yourself to the public as “an all-star team of owners,” but then you can’t stop suing each other.
But there is good news.
Or bad news.
Well, either way, significant news.
If ever an offseason was going to define an ownership group, this is it. Hunker down, Spirit boys, because this is when you either step up and convey some sense of stability within your franchises, or once again pull a Curly and confuse the blast powder with the pancake mix. (Boom.)
The Atlanta Spirit employs two general managers, Billy Knight and Don Waddell, with cracked track records.
It employs one basketball coach, Mike Woodson, whose regular seasons have been fairly decisive but whose recent postseason has left everybody confused (three huge upsets at home; four revolting losses on the road by 101 points).
The Spirit fired its hockey coach, Bob Hartley, six games into the NHL season, a swift and decisive, even if short-sighted, move that really accomplished nothing, unless you count forcing Waddell to form lines with his own mistakes.
OK, Spirit boys, are you tired of getting beaten up? What’s next?
It has been stated before, but it’s worth repeating. Sports franchises can be successful in a number of ways. Great players can overcome average coaching. Great coaches can succeed with average players. General managers can build winners by accruing solid, even if unspectacular, players. Or they can pick up just enough All-Stars to compensate for the duds.
Trades can make up for bad drafts, and vice-versa.
But there is one thing a sports franchise can’t overcome: bad ownership.
Fans don’t need their team to win every season. They just need to know that owners are trying to do things correctly, smartly. They need to know that they care. They don’t want to hear excuses. They don’t want to sense arrogance from the basketball GM or witness infantile outbursts by the hockey owner.
Fans want accountability.
You want to fix things, guys? Fix it now.
Waddell presumably has convinced owners he has things under control and that this season was an aberration (not to be confused with the other years of aberrations). I say “presumably” because only Bruce Levenson has publicly expressed confidence in Waddell. Michael Gearon, the other most active, non-ex-communicated owner in the group, has stayed in the background on hockey matters.
Waddell’s latest bit of amusing scrambling came in Craig Custance’s examination of the dysfunctional relationship between the Thrashers and their affiliate, the AHL’s Chicago Wolves. At one point, Waddell suggested the Thrashers were in an advantageous position over the Detroit Red Wings because Atlanta’s prospects were in the AHL playoffs and the Wings’ prospects weren’t. The problem: The Thrashers’ prospects are in the playoffs every year and it doesn’t seem to make a difference in the Thrashers’ season. The Red Wings? They win Stanley Cups.
Waddell has yet to hire a coach. The bigger concern is that owners have yet to state their plan for the franchise. They have yet to hire an outside hockey adviser, as had been suggested. The Thrashers played their last game a month ago. If owners were waiting for the basketball season to end before deliberating on hockey matters, doesn’t that make you feel a little uncomfortable?
The Hawks also have significant issues. They actually have time on the player decisions. But Gearon’s comments Monday after wanting to “take a step back for several days” are unsettling. The Knight and Woodson issues have been on the table all season. Good owners always have a Plan B. If there were thoughts of firing Knight, there must have been thoughts about qualified replacements.
If the owners decide to fire Knight but keep Woodson, what would that say about Knight’s replacement, who wouldn’t be allowed to hire his own coach? What GM would take this job under those circumstances, and would you trust his ability to grab what the Hawks accomplished in the last playoffs and take it the next level?
The easy answer is to fire everybody. But the bigger issue is whether these owners can reach clear and logical decisions that put two franchises on solid ground. We’re still waiting.
Permalink | Comments (51) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA, Thrashers/NHL
The Tuesday Countdown
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
10: If I seem a little down today, I just read that Scarlett Johansson is off the market. Feel free to Google, then return. We’ll wait.
9: The monthly meeting of “Women Who Haven’t Slept with Roger Clemens” will meet this evening at Applebees. A table for six has been reserved.
8: On the open market: Avery Johnson. Mike D’Antoni. Jeff Van Gundy. Rick Carlisle (though reportedly close to the Dallas job). Please, state your case. How does Hawks coach Mike Woodson makes you better than any of them?
7: That said: This should be the general manager’s call. The new general manager’s call. If Billy Knight is fired and Woodson is kept, which is possible, what respected general manager will want this job, knowing the coach’s contract already has been extended?
6: A leftover from a chat with Falcons owner Arthur Blank last week: “When I bought the team in 2002, Michael [Vick] was already here. People credited me for drafting him, but that was before I got here. I always gave credit to the Smith family. Now when I say that, the Smith family probably doesn’t want to hear it.”
5: I’m guessing Arthur isn’t in the mood to drop any one-liners this week. Without presuming either the guilt or innocence of linebacker Michael Boley, having a player charged with spousal abuse obliterates any chance of the franchise completely cleansing its image and Blank getting any sleep this off-season.
4: Question: Do divorce attorneys go prospecting for business or do they just want for women to come to them? Because I’m just wondering how many might be contacting Debbie Clemens. You know. Just in case.
3: PETA tends to go overboard on several issues, becoming almost cartoon-like. But the organization is correct in mandating changes in thoroughbred racing.
2: You would never have known this from NBC’s coverage of the Kentucky Derby, because the network apparently didn’t want to ruin the glorious moment of Big Brown’s win and rich people with six drinks and funny hats celebrating. But second-place winner Eight Belles fractured two ankles, leading to the horse being immediately euthanized. First place goes to the Preakness. Second-place is dead. Thoroughbreds are beautiful animals. But they have Godzilla-like torsos and are running on toothpicks, and injuries and deaths are too easily accepted.
1: Longtime NFL writer Peter King of Sports Illustrated just ranked all 32 NFL teams, and guess who’s last? I don’t agree with the rankings but this analysis is dead on: “When you need 12 to 15 new starters, you’re basically dealing with a construction job like an expansion team.”
Permalink | Comments (35) | Categories: Braves/MLB, Falcons/NFL, Hawks/NBA
BCS refuses to see it’s obsolete
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Several years have passed since the BCS and its mutant forefathers first proved itself to be a pox on college football.
Four months have passed since the NCAA’s board of directors punted an eight-team playoff proposal from Georgia President Michael Adams.
A week has passed since the BCS commissioner creatively spun that the system was “in an unprecedented state of health.” This ignores evidence that it’s actually the sport in an unprecedented state of health, not the postseason structure, which is closer to Randall P. McMurphy’s bunkmate.
But there is good news: It has been 65 million years since dinosaurs roamed the Earth, and we still don’t really know what happened to all of them. So as slow development goes, the BCS is not alone.
“If I’ve learned anything, it’s that nothing happens quickly in higher education,” Adams said. “But I certainly believe there’s still a chance that something could happen within a couple of years.”
Adams’ remarks run counter to the general belief that college football’s logically challenged bowl system won’t change for at least six years because of existing television contracts. But his sense is that the majority of college presidents aren’t nearly as resolute in their defense of the BCS as they would have you believe.
“There’s still going to be discussion — but I want to know what went on at that meeting before I go any further out on the limb than I already am,” said Adams, who was attending Georgia’s annual athletic meetings at Lake Oconee when BCS officials were in Florida on Wednesday rejecting a “plus-one” playoff format. “I would be surprised if we had a period of six years where the BCS worked at a level where we were all pleased.”
Of the six major conferences, only the SEC and ACC openly endorsed the plus-one scenario (effectively a two-tiered, four-team playoff). Opposing: The Rose Bowl’s two linked conferences, the Pacific 10 and Big Ten, as well as the Big 12 and Big East.
Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said he “felt vindicated” by the overwhelming opposition, given his conference has been viewed as the primary obstacle. But if that bothered Adams — alum of a Big Ten school, Ohio State — he wasn’t showing it.
“I can tell you that most of these people are friends of mind and sometimes what they say in private and what they say to the press are two different things,” he said. “Again, I want to wait to find out what happened before I say too much. But I can simply tell you that like most things in higher education, there’s not unanimity.”
Traditionalists have long opposed a playoff system, partly in the belief that it would diminish the importance of the regular season and the tradition of the bowls. It’s a legitimate argument.
The flaws in their argument are twofold: 1) Any BCS system eats into the bowl tradition, and bowl games had matchups before the current structure. 2) College football’s leveling landscape, which has made for an increasing number of “upsets” and unprecedented debate over polls, makes this a logical time for a more exact science.
In retrospect, Adams’ eight-team proposal might’ve been too big of a leap for college presidents who are worried about perceptions that they speak out of both sides of their mouth, which, of course, they do. (Breakfast meeting: Pass legislation to strengthen academics. Lunch meeting: Approve 12-game football schedules.)
But sticking with the status quo seems nonsensical. A plus-one is the best compromise. There would be debate about what four schools belong in the semifinals, but certainly no more debate than there is now over the rankings. And in the end, there would be clarity.
ACC commissioner John Swofford is walking a tightrope. He’s a proponent of a plus-one system, but he’s also the coordinator of the BCS. Therein lies the reason for his convoluted remarks last week: “We have decided that because we feel at this time the BCS is in an unprecedented state of health … we have made a decision to move forward in the next cycle with the current format.”
When asked about Swafford’s comments, Adams actually laughed.
And then: “John’s a friend of mine. Generally I think he’s a good guy and a good thinker.”
Just not in this case.
“I don’t agree with John that everything is working well in the system. I respect John. But when 80 percent of the public [according to polls] thinks there’s something wrong with it, that says something to me.”
There is hope. Millions of years from now, scientists will debate whether the BCS ran out of food, was hit by a meteor or just fell into a tar pit.
Permalink | Comments (56) | Post your comment | Categories: Tech/ACC, UGA/SEC
Young Hawks handling things better than coach
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
In more ways than we ever could have guessed, say, a week ago, this season has been an unexpected gift for the Hawks.
They have re-ignited this city’s pro basketball fans. They have seen what Joe Johnson can do when a team really needs him to do it. They have identified a young player who is a certain building block for the future (Al Horford) and another who may have significant issues (Marvin Williams). It doesn’t matter what happens tonight or for the rest of their playoff lives. None of that is going away.
The problem is the undercurrent. Mike Woodson can be a nice enough guy. He just hasn’t been a particularly smart guy of late, in large part because of speculation on his job security.
This isn’t a subject that ever should come up in the middle of a playoff series, let alone a franchise’s first playoff series in nine seasons. It wasn’t a subject any member of the media likely would have ever broached Wednesday when the Hawks, in the most remarkable story of this or most postseasons, were coming off consecutive wins over the 66-win Boston Celtics and were preparing for Game 5.
But Woodson, even if unintentionally, kicked open the door to the subject. Responding to a question about Josh Smith’s future, Woodson, for no apparent reason, began, “At the end of the season, if I’m the coach …”
Oops.
Now. Why are we going there?
This was sort of like a prosecutor hearing a defense attorney mistakenly bringing up an issue in a defendant’s past and thinking, “Well, now I can ask about it.”
The next few questions focused on Woodson. Not the Hawks, not the two wins in Philips Arena, not any of his suddenly resilient players — unless you count the time Woodson responded to one question with: “You guys think this team should be the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I don’t see it that way. We’ve got some good pieces but we’re young.”
First of all, I don’t ever remember anybody in this town drawing parallels between the Hawks and sliced bread. Stale bread, maybe.
Secondly — huh?
I’m trying to recall the last time the Braves were wrecked by injuries or considered an underdog in the postseason and Bobby Cox saying, in so many words, “You know, we’re really not that good.” Or, “We’re kind of lucky to be here.”
He might think it. But he wouldn’t say it — certainly not when his team was coming off two dramatic victories and, as an unexpected bonus, had panicked the sports fans of Boston.
But Woodson has been doing this sort of thing for weeks now. As the focus on him has increased, he has increasingly alluded to the Hawks’ youth and personnel deficiencies, indirectly pointing the finger at general manager Billy Knight. (Safe to say both sides have ammunition in that debate.)
In one recent radio interview, Woodson remarked, “Personally, I think I’ve done an unbelievable job,” strange words from a man with a four-year regular season record of 106-222.
Woodson fumed Thursday when he read media accounts of his comments in Boston.
When asked Thursday — by a reporter he likes — if he could clarify his remarks, Woodson gave an angry, “No comment.”
A few minutes later, he was asked by somebody he doesn’t like (me).
Question: “I understand you’re upset about …”
Answer: “I have no comments. Turn off your recorder. I’m done.”
Question: “Are the quotes accurate? Were they misrepresented in some way?”
Answer: “I have no comment.”
Question: “I’m giving you a chance to clarify your …”
Answer: “No, I’m not gonna give you a chance. For what? I’m done. Thank you.”
Lost on Woodson: If he hadn’t opened the door, nobody would’ve walked in.
Oddly, those young, inexperienced Hawks players Woodson has alluded to are handling the post-season far better than their coach.
Josh Childress (granted, well-schooled at Stanford) said: “Stuff like that shouldn’t come up in the middle of a playoff series. But I don’t think it’s a distraction to the players. Maybe coach is thinking about it a little more than we are. The focus should be on us trying to win, it shouldn’t be on: Is he secure in his job for next year? This is a big time for all of us in the organization.”
Yes, it is. It was a wonderful way for Childress to answer a question and yet defuse a topic. Woodson might want to take notes.
Friday night, the Hawks play Game 6.
A win would be even bigger than Game 4, which was even bigger than Game 3.
A loss, and this still would have been a sweet ride.
Would’ve been a nice thing to focus on.
Permalink | Comments (70) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
MOST POPULAR STORIES
Latest comments
Why not bypass the BCS and colleges altogether. Why not have a minor league of football for players coming out of high school. Have an age, or years played, limit for the players in the league. Each team pays the players and also contributes to an education... read the full comment by onedawg | Comment on BCS refuses to see it's obsolete Read BCS refuses to see it's obsolete
SO, what’s the deal??? Has Don FRAUDell been FIRED yet??? Is he DONE Waddell yet??? Can we look forward to brighter days yet, or are we stuck with the... read the full comment by NASCAR Dave | Comment on Why promote Waddell? Read Why promote Waddell?
The BCS is a joke. Eveyone on the planet except ten executives in a board room know this. Until the PAC 10 and BIG 10 have their teams play in a championship game like every other major conference, there will never be any integrity to who is the true... read the full comment by KB | Comment on BCS refuses to see it's obsolete Read BCS refuses to see it's obsolete
you know how stubit the ownership is to let Waddel to keep stewing the team up what he had done is’nt good look that the draft pick he have done only four is doing good or ok he have stew up big time and they said they don’t want to stared over... read the full comment by Ronald | Comment on Why promote Waddell? Read Why promote Waddell?