Originally Posted by htismaqe
I'm not suggest your force a coach on the GM.
I'm suggesting the GM and head coach should be peers and work hand-in-hand.
To take your analogy further, Clark Hunt is the CEO. The GM is the CTO and the coach is the COO. The CTO creates the vision and acquires the "technical" pieces to accomplish the organizational vision. The COO carries out the plan and manages the operation. They're peers, independent and interdependent at the same time.
I'm not disagreeing that they do markedly different tasks within the organization, but the fact is the GM hires the coach. I think what you are wanting is a GM who will let the coach coach. To that end I agree 100%. It is critical to the success of the organization that GM lets the coach do his job and not meddle like an obsessive ****.
I don't see any reason to believe Clark will now start hiring coaches to change that dynamic. And frankly, I don't think we want that. Clark isn't a football guy and doesn't immerse himself in the league enough to know the nuances between coaches, scheme, personnel, all that stuff. That'd be like me me picking drapes. I'm most likely to make a horrible decision. I may pick some out that strike some fancy with me, but the probability of them working with the design function of the room, or having any intrinsic functional use is low. I could luck out and make the right choice, but let's be real here. I'm gonna **** that up. Bad.
IMO, you pick a good GM. GM hires a good coach. Both do their jobs and work together. If a GM is incapable of that, he's not a good GM.