Originally Posted by patteeu
I don't agree at all. CEOs with what you're calling "absolute power" run large organizations all over our country. It's the standard organizational model. IMO, it's a lot better to have one person in charge than it is to expect two to work together without one being able to have the final say. Ideally, the person in charge will be good at accepting input and forming consensus within the leadership of the organization but someone has to make the final decision. It can be the GM or the HC, but someone has to be the final say unless the owner is willing to referee disagreements.
I don't know who it was that said that Carl and Marty were peers, but that wasn't the case. Carl was the boss for most of their time together. Marty was reportedly given greater control over personnel at the end, but it's not clear to me what the arrangement was and it certainly didn't improve the product on the field.
I think you kind of took my statement wrong, or I phrased it a little wrong.
The GM will make the personnel decisions, based on what the coach inputs to him that he wants and what he then thinks is the best. We have a huge disconnect here in that our current GM makes decisions seemingly not caring what the coach wants and what HE along thinks is best.
The NFL is a little different than big business, but you are right in that one guy will make the decision.