I could see him as a sort of "coach emeritus". Not head coach, does not have to travel, but work with players during practice, do one on one coaching, and so forth. And some personal appearance stuff. He could be valuable there. And yes, the name factor would generate buzz. As far as his trash talking Portland & Blazers, first, he trash talked everyone. Second, if he's willing to come here for the right price, that's his contradiction, not ours.
I am not so sure Phil has worked one on one with any players for a few decades. Few head coaches do. Here is an article about the topic: Bilas cited such stellar NBA coaches as Phil Jackson and Larry Brown to make his point. "Have you ever heard anybody say of an NBA coach, 'Hey, Phil Jackson does a great job developing players and turning players into all-stars or Hall of Famers?'" Bilas said. "And, 'Larry Brown does a great job of developing all-stars.' "They never say that." Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/06/26/2238849/espns-bilas-says-coaches-deserve.html#storylink=cpy
Here's my concern: If you bring in Phil with some kind of vague role where he is President/Asst coach/basketball adviser you open up the door to some very serious chemistry issues with your GM, your head coach, and your front office as a whole. Phil has never been afraid to make waves, and I could very easily see him contradicting Olshey on a move, or stepping on whoever we hire as HC, especially if it's someone new to head coaching like Shaw or Malone. This organization has already had enough problems with too many cooks in the kitchen. Hat guy, Kolde, Vulcan.... the last thing we need is a vocal celebrity in the basketball community shaking things up and causing friction. If he wants to be the head coach, great, if he wants to be the President... I'm okay with that, but I don't want some blurred role for him that could cause problems and hurt feelings.
Do you think the Milwaukee Bucks, New Orleans Hornets, Houston Rockets, Denver Nuggets, Indiana Pacers, or any other middling and/or small market teams wouldn't fucking jump at the chance to have PHIL MUTHERFUCKING JACKSON as part of their organization in any capacity? Sometimes you people can't see the Forest through the Trees.
1996. The whole team added it to their names in a show of solidarity. Jack Haley still uses it in public, but nobody gets it.
If this story is indeed true, it likely is an indication that PA would be once again willing to open his wallet to win.
No it really doesn't ... This is part of it. The other part is that players could give two shits about who the CEO of a basketball team is, they want to get paid, they want minutes and they usually want to live in a warm climate and/or a big city (usally in that order). Adding Phil Jackson to the front office just means we've got a President with no business experience and doesn't change the desirability of Portland as a destination. For those of you who think this is a great idea, please break down the mechanics of how hiring him to be overseer affects the basketball ops side? Don't just say "he adds credibility and that will attract free agents." That utterly fails to explain the "how"
Playing or a championship HOF coach is one thing, playing for a championship NOF coach who is now a President is a completely other. I agree with you.
Oh Good. Jaynes gushes over the thought of bringing Jackson on board. That confirms why I can't stand the idiot... WARNING: LINK TO A JAYNES ARTICLE
