For a few years, I have seen a theory that Mike Tannenbaum is very hands off in his talent evaluation. He is not a football lifer. He has a law degree and was originally brought to the Jets by Bill Parcells to run the salary cap. The theory was that Eric Mangini had a good eye for talent noting how the team's performance in the Draft has dropped since Mangini was fired. We saw it in the people who thought Bill Callahan recommended going with Wayne Hunter and Vladimir Ducasse. We saw it with the whole re-signing Eric Smith to start at safety thing because the coaches loved him.
I was always kind of skeptical of this theory. More and more, though, I am coming around to it. Last night reports surfaced that Tony Sparano was wild about the idea of Tim Tebow's potential in the Wildcat. He probably endorsed the idea to Tannenbaum. That does not mean Tannenbaum had to agree with it, though.
When you supervise numerous divisions, you have to put the entire operation above any of the individual parts. Yes, getting Tebow would help the run game and Sparano by extension. Is that what was best for the team as a whole, though? The Jets had limited money and Draft picks to improve problems way more important than the upgrade Tebow would provide over Jeremy Kerley as a gadget quarterback. I mean starting positions like outside linebacker and safety. How about the impact on chemistry? Antonio Cromartie tweeted since yesterday in no uncertain terms he did not want Tebow. How about the huge distraction the calls for Tebow to start over Mark Sanchez will provide? Are any of these worth the marginal upgrade for an offensive package?
A general manager of an NFL team should depend on his coaching staff for advice, but he needs to make the decision, not simply follow any advice he is given. If Tannenbaum is doing that, it still feels like his decision-making skills needed for his job are not very good.
Would the Jets be better served with somebody with more football experience making the decisions?