Irsay and Ballard

[bertjones]

Originally Posted by JesusChrist

I just never understand why Ballard would need to offer a "fig leaf" to Irsay in the form of keeping Pagano. Either Irsay trusted Ballard to rebuild this team or he didn't. Pagano should be no part of that. He obviously hired Ballard so he should trust him to rebuild as he sees fit at that point, and pretty much every time a new GM comes in, that means a new head coach, and it SHOULD have been the case here.

The only excuse that even remotely registers is that they didn't want to make a change with Luck injured to where he couldn't get reps in the new system, but even then, why stick with mediocrity? Just bite the bullet and next year they would be in year 2 of a system instead of starting over like they likely will be.

My thought is that Irsay really insisted on keeping Pagano for this year, perhaps to the point of making it a condition. Ballard really wanted the job, primarily because of Luck. Since he knew that this was a rebuilding year anyway
he abided by the "request'. Not exactly the way he wanted to start out
but not fatal to the big picture.

[DrSpaceman]

Originally Posted by 1965southpaw

My understanding of the situation is that Irsay WAS open to upgrading from Pagano but only if he could land a big name proven winner (harbaugh, Saban, etc...). When he wasn't able to make a deal with any of his short list candidates he made the change he could make (upgrade the GM)......and turn over the reigns to Ballard. I hear the same as Bert....,that Ballard has claimed Chuckie will be assessed on development of young talent......hence I firmly believe he's out after this year even if we manage to limp our way into a conference championship.

This is what I believe as well.

He wanted a new coach but did not want to hire just anyone as the replacement. He missed out on those he was after and just decided to stick with Pagano