More cost cutting for the Colts: Gone are scouting consultant Dom Anile and scout Ryan Cavanaugh
One of the great advantages of having someone like John Oehser in the blogosphere is he will report on interesting Colts-related news events that other media outlets (hint, hint, The Indy Star) won't. As John reported last week, and colts9318rock blogged about this weekend, the Colts have parted ways with longtime scouting and personnel master Dom Anile.
Anile has been with the Colts since 1998, when he was hired as the director of football operations. However, the last few years, Anile has been a consultant on scouting and the draft. Oehser explains Anile's role:
Anile, who had been with the team for 11 years, had held a very prominent role in the draft room for his first eight years with the organization, and the way I understand it is although his role had been reduced in the last three years, his voice was still a promiment one when it came time to debating and discussing players. Part of his value was the willingness to go against the opinion of the room occasion, which can be a valuable thing in any decision-making process.
The Colts also parted ways with longtime scout Ralph Cavanaugh, who John clearly seems to think highly of:
Scouts get little publicity around the NFL, and that’s particularly true around the Colts, though Colts President Bill Polian without question values scouts greatly, and there’s no way he likes having to trim that area. So, while Colts fans may not ever have known Cavanaugh’s name — or most others in the department – he’s a knowledgeable football guy with a bright future in the league. My understanding is he has drawn some interest around the NFL despite many teams making similar staff reductions to those made by the Colts.
Why are the Colts doing all this? Well, it's not just the Colts who are trimming costs. Every team in this league is cutting back on scouts, personnel, and other positions. The excuse is the current state of the economy, but that is an excuse many people just aren't buying. Some argue that the recent cost-cutting by the owners is a way of conveying to the players that economic times are tough. So, when they try and renegotiate the CBA next off-season, the owners will cry that the cupboard is bare and the players must relinquish the hefty percentage they receive from TV rights.
Of course, the players will laugh at this.
You can't cry poverty one minute and the next minute give a rookie like Matthew Stafford $42 million and a lazy malcontent like Albert Haynesworth $100 million.
For the Colts, losing scouts like Cavanaugh and personnel guys like Anile will hurt them a bit in the future. Then again, all teams are hurt when they have to cutback on scouting, and the whole league will be hurting when this new CBA gets negotiated.
9 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yep...
We’re eliminating positions in our scouting department for no reason. Giving big contracts to rookies and players like Haynesworth proves, beyond any doubt, that teams have infinite financial resources and have not been affected by the economic decline. If there is anything that could ever make it clear that team’s (Colts included) are going through tight financial times, it is Bill Polian gimping in scouting department. Bank it.
Question of priorities
Teams can give players like Haynesworth 100 million dollars, but its stupid to do that while giving no money to your scouts or your assistant coaches. Its sort of like these bankers who made 20 MILLION a year and then “cut costs” by firing people making 40,000 a year. Total joke.
I'm not
Making an excuse for NFL team owners generally. I’m saying that if anyone needs PROOF that, whether they find it believable or not, NFL franchises are being affected by the current economy – one need look no further than Bill Polian/Jim Irsay cutting costs in the SCOUTING department. That’s all.
There is nothing to make "an excuse" for
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 11, 2009 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I understand that...
And you know we’re on the same page when it comes to these things. However, I didn’t want to re-ignite an argument that I don’t think belongs on a Colts fan site anyway. So, to facilitate my hopes that the bigger argument need not be rekindled I spoke only of the Colts and the making movements to the scouting department is as clear an indication that the economy must be affecting this team as anyone could hope to see (well not hope to… but you get the point).
Again your argument holds no water...
Teams are being affected by the economy but rather than cut the salaries of people already making ALL the money they instead cut the “little” guys like scouts and such. Its a dumb move both ethically as well as for your business.
But hey guys keep backing big management and big corporations! Its done Wonders for our economy lately and I am sure it will improve the quality of play in the NFL when you cut the “muscle” but keep the “fat.”
You must be right...
After all, you say so. My argument definitely holds no water. I’m an apologist for the incredibly rich team owners in the NFL. You got me. I’m done with this nonsense.
"Little guy"?
How can you call Dom Anile one of the “little guys”?
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 11, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Overleveraged
Some of the teams are doing quite financially well….but have any of you considered that many of these teams are most likely overleveraged? Some of these teams are not financially healthy and the public does not know about it.

by 




























