Should quarterbacks have input in personnel matters?

Getty Images

The report that Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers feels frustration over not being involved in personnel decisions that affect him creates the impression that other quarterbacks get that kind of consideration. Few, if any, ever do.

So here’s the question: Should they?

Quarterbacks are expected to serve as an extension of the coaching staff, setting the example for other players by showing up early, staying late, studying film, and doing everything the team wants, and more. Plenty of quarterbacks are expected to be even more vocal and direct in serving as de facto coaches on the field, leveraging the credibility that they bring to the table because they suit up and play.

So if a quarterback is expected to behave like he’s part employee and part management, shouldn’t the quarterback at least be in the loop as to the decisions made by management? Even if the team will do what it’s going to do without the blessing of (or in the face of a strenuous objection by) the quarterback, it’s only fair to a guy who is expected to act like he’s got one foot in each camp to be treated like he does.

This means not only being told in advance that a key move is coming but also having a chance to make his case against the move in a meaningful fashion before the decision is finalized.  And that applies to every starting quarterback (including Rodgers and the rest of them).

The team has a fair expectation that the starting quarterback necessarily will be acting like much more than just another player. The starting quarterback should expect to be treated that way all the time, and not only when it benefits the team to have the quarterback assisting the coaching staff on an unofficial basis.

53 responses to “Should quarterbacks have input in personnel matters?

  1. A long-term franchise QB should have some input into various personnel decisions, especially the ones impacting the offensive side of the ball. Not final say, of course, but his opinion and advice should be given consideration.

  2. No. Aaron Rodgers is being a diva. He isn’t the GM or coach. I think he is angry about losing Jordy Nelson and I don’t blame him but he shouldn’t get too whiny about it.

  3. If the player has worked with a prospective player before, sure… input. Mentallywoozy said it extremely well. Input, sure. But decision maker or having too much influence, absolutely not.

  4. A quarterback shouldn’t automatically have input in personnel matters.
    It should be an earned reward, not just for quarterbacks but for veteran leaders.
    Input but not final decisions.
    If you have a stud middle linebacker that has been on the team for 8 elite years, but a so so QB, I would value his input over the QBs

  5. Players are not trained to be talent evaluators, but they may have some valuable insight. For example a Coach may ask a player how they think someone would fit based on playing with them before. That’s normal. However, no player should have any decision making influence outside of giving their professional view on a player if asked. Any other lobbying by players is surely ignored for the most part.

  6. Depends on the quarterback. Just like the GM heeds to a greater or lesser extent the coach’s input (and sometimes IS the coach), depending on who that coach is, the team may want to listen to their QB’s input on personnel or they might not. Good leaders understand that they don’t have all the answers and will want to listen to input from others who have both a vested interest and qualified knowledge about the roster. If your QB is a rookie or a newly signed free agent, of course you don’t give him a lot of say, but if you’ve got a HoF caliber guy with a demonstrated understanding of the team’s offense, you probably ought to give him a listen.

  7. steelerdeathstar says:
    April 17, 2018 at 1:59 pm
    A long-term franchise QB should have some input into various personnel decisions, especially the ones impacting the offensive side of the ball. Not final say, of course, but his opinion and advice should be given consideration.

    ———-

    Just like anyone you get advice from you always have to consider the objectivity of the person you are asking. Would you really ask Rodgers if you were thinking of getting rid of Jordy? How could you ever get an objective opinion.

  8. Absolutely not. A can of worms that should never be opened. ‘What do you mean you’re cutting my buddy’. Do your job, as someone once said. Team building us not a player’s job.

  9. No, and tell the diva to shut up. If he wants to be apart of that process, then maybe he should retire and become an office guy.

  10. No. Let’s just say Helll No. You don’t make personnel decisions. You are a player, period.

  11. I think franchise guys should at least have input. Like the article says, they are an extension of the coaching staff, and they know what guys work best with them. Do I think any QBs should have a say? Of course not, that could alter rosters significantly from year to year on teams with bad QBs. But if you invest 4 or 5 years in a guy, with the plans of keeping him even longer than that, yes, let him have a say. The QB is the only player you build a team around.

  12. Input, yes. Influence, not so much. I think it would be too hard to let personal connections play a factor in personnel decisions. But if you’re on the fence about a move; going to the QB and getting his perspective on the locker room impact or if he felt the player wasn’t giving his all or some such; could be valuable information.

  13. If the franchise QB is a tier 1, HOF bound QB like Rodgers, Brady, Brees, then Yes, he should be consulted about picking up free agent WRs, TEs, RBs, and any QB coaching changes. Not the final say, but should be consulted for input. He shouldn’t be asked about defense or non-QB coaches.

  14. Throw an extra piece of moldy bread into his cell tonight… er, Oh wait. We’re doing First World Problems.

  15. No way at all. This guy needs to learn how to run an offense without free plays. His hands are full overcoming being washed up.

  16. OK, fine let Rodgers have personnel meetings with mgmt. Suppose Matthews wants some input also. OK, let him in too. Now Cobb wants to sit in as well. My point is where do you draw the line?? If you say draw the line at QB’s only, how will that go over in a situation like KC?? Mahomes gets a say but the other vets don’t?? Not a good blueprint for success.

  17. Kevin Garnett had a lot of influence on what players the Timberwolves signed and kept. He made sure his buddies got to stay and the guys he didn’t like left. Needless to say, they were one-and-done in the playoffs almost every year.

  18. Yeah, it’s never good to seek a consensus when decision making, including seeking opinions from the participants who must bear the brunt of that decision-making. Further, it apparently makes no sense to seek opinions of one of the best (to avoid the Pats homers that consider it a major crime not to mention Brady here), smartest NFL QBs that has been in the same offensive system for 10 years. Did anyone read about how successful the Eagles offense was based upon consensus decision-making between the coaches and players? Have none of the commenters on this site ever expressed their opinion to superiors, or felt they should be allowed to do so, on personnel matters?

  19. We need to look at this question through our “2018 America” glasses. The real questions are, would it be discriminatory if the QB influenced decision makers about certain players. What if Aaron Rodgers didn’t like a certain receiver cuz he wasn’t as fast as AR wants him to be, and that player was cut because of that. That’s blatant discrimination against him. He cant control his physical attributes anymore than he can control his skin color. If you cut a player because he is slow, or short, or old, that’s discrimination. We will not stand for this

  20. only if they are willing to take less money to pay these guys. once Rodgers gets his 30+ per year and however many hundreds of millions guaranteed, he better not complain or show frustration once on a receiver not being where he should or the line not blocking better. can’t pay those around you if you have it all. you want in on the decision of who to keep, give up some money so they can keep them.

  21. I don’t see anything wrong with “Hey Aaron, we are thinking of signing Jimmy Graham or Dez Bryant, you have any problem with those two?”

    I do see a problem with “Hey Aaron, can we release your friend?”

  22. NO. It’s obvious few people even consider the financial implications of building a team. How else could so many people think NE could have kept Jimmy G?

  23. I certainly think a long time top level QB should have input, particularly if it involves a key player, if nothing else as a heads up or a feel for the locker room.

    However input and influence are 2 different things, and a QB should understand that.

    Rodgers also saw the firing of his QB coach and a few others- that a veteran player should definitely be considered in that scenario, and I think Rodgers is right in being a little miffed at that.

  24. purpleguy says:
    April 17, 2018 at 2:53 pm
    Have none of the commenters on this site ever expressed their opinion to superiors, or felt they should be allowed to do so, on personnel matters?
    _________________________________________

    Yes, I’m sure they have. And I’m sure half f them were told to shut up and bus table 12.

  25. purpleguy says:
    April 17, 2018 at 2:53 pm
    Yeah, it’s never good to seek a consensus when decision making, including seeking opinions from the participants who must bear the brunt of that decision-making. Further, it apparently makes no sense to seek opinions of one of the best (to avoid the Pats homers that consider it a major crime not to mention Brady here), smartest NFL QBs that has been in the same offensive system for 10 years. Did anyone read about how successful the Eagles offense was based upon consensus decision-making between the coaches and players? Have none of the commenters on this site ever expressed their opinion to superiors, or felt they should be allowed to do so, on personnel matters?

    ————-

    If you decide not to consult someone in your organization, there is probably a reason. Maybe you think they have a biased opinion, maybe you think they can’t add value on that particularly topic, etc. It’s not like the Packers didn’t think about talking to Rodgers. They intentionally didn’t talk to Rodgers.

  26. Those saying “yes they should have a say” have no perception on the reality of the real world. I don’t get a say on who my bosses or co-workers are. And I certainly don’t expect to.

  27. A few years back, the Cowboys had Troy Aikman work out the two tight ends they had rated highest. That would be Tony Gonzalez and David LeFleur. It was well reported at the time that Aikman preferred LeFleur, citing his rare combinations of skills. Players should not be in the business of evaluating other players, or making business decisions for the team.

  28. rparrott4 says:
    April 17, 2018 at 3:58 pm

    Those saying “yes they should have a say” have no perception on the reality of the real world. I don’t get a say on who my bosses or co-workers are. And I certainly don’t expect to.
    ———————————————–

    Honestly, that depends on your position and importance in the company- I certainly had input into who was hired and fired, and had “bosses” defer to me at times. I would think that a guy like Rodgers (or Brady, or Brees etc.) should at least have some input.

    Does anyone not think the reason Tod Hailey is out in Pitt. is because Ben doesn’t like/get along with him?

  29. Most of the time I would say players play, coaches coach, managers manage, but in the case of Aaron Rodgers, I really do think the Packers would be wise to weigh in on what he’s thinking.

  30. He’s not telling the front office who to draft or which FAs to sign. But he is watching productive players get cut or leaving. BIG DIFFERENCE.

  31. A-Rod can be annoyed. He can also get over it. Best and most important player in the league or not, one of the things that had to change when MM took over as coach was the way Burt was treated compared to everyone else, and being one of the guys when Burt left was a BIG help for Aaron in winning over his veteran teammates. The only way a coach should even be involved if there is a GM is to ask (occasionally only) player A, or player B. Which one fits your schemes better? Players will chose their friends, and coaches will chose the guy that produced in the past for him. Both are bad recipes.

    That being said it WILL SERIOUSLY hurt to watch Cobb suck yet again for 12 mil that should have gone to Jordy, or even an more talented wet noodle.

  32. This kind of thing bothers me in basketball. The BS with LeBron and the Cavs should be enough to see that it isn’t a good idea.

  33. Unless thatt QB has spent hours studying tape of the DT from East Northwest State College, then no.

  34. No, unless your QB is the team and rest of the roster is garbage not capable of more than 5 wins without their QB.

    I bet MM, MM l, and BG ran to the phones to apologize to AR after this story broke.

  35. The Rodgers to Nelson relationship went beyond Xs and Os. It’s like they could read each other’s mind. As a Viking fan I’m glad the pack got rid of Jordy, but in this case Rodgers should have been involved. I bet Cobb would be gone and Nelson would have taken a pay cut and continued to catch TD passes from Rodgers.

  36. No you don’t give the qb any input on personnel matters as the quarterback is not evaluated on this. What valuable insight could Rodgers provide on defensive selection? Running back? What players out there has enough time to do their own work and evaluate others?

  37. rparrott4 says:
    April 17, 2018 at 3:58 pm

    Those saying “yes they should have a say” have no perception on the reality of the real world. I don’t get a say on who my bosses or co-workers are. And I certainly don’t expect to.
    ———————————————–

    Honestly, that depends on your position and importance in the company- I certainly had input into who was hired and fired, and had “bosses” defer to me at times. I would think that a guy like Rodgers (or Brady, or Brees etc.) should at least have some input.

    Does anyone not think the reason Tod Hailey is out in Pitt. is because Ben doesn’t like/get along with him?

    — — — — — —

    I agree with you 100% position and rank matters, but he’s not QB/Assistant GM. His title is QB and nothing more. Perhaps during contract negotiations they can add these titles in, but until then, he’s just an employee.

  38. I don’t know. Right after Jim Caldwell was fired, Matthew Stafford came out and said he hoped they’d keep Jim Bob Cooter as OC. He got raked over that, because that kind of input, public to be sure, gave the impression that Cooter could be a litmus test for the new coach. As in, star QB, angling for management to keep the OC who’s made him better, may not be happy if the OC wasn’t kept around, etc. Sound familiar?

  39. A couple things.

    1. Asking a QB about personnel matters, especially on the offensive side of the ball is a very good idea. Hiring a WR or TE that they don’t like and paying them alot won’t help you when the QB won’t throw to them. Asking doesn’t mean that they are making the decision.

    2. Everyone is assuming that Rodgers was talking about Nelson, I think the bigger personnel decision(s) he was concerned about was with the coaching staff most notably the QB Coach that he liked being let go.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!