What NFL Front Offices Get Wrong—and Why It Matters in Law
As a Philly sports fan, I’ve always believed winning starts at the top. Not just on the field, but in the front office. If the structure is broken, the product usually is too. Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about NFL organizational hierarchy—and how some teams seem determined to make things harder than they need to be.
Most successful football teams follow a clear chain of command. Ownership hires a general manager. The general manager hires the coach. Everyone knows who answers to whom. Accountability is clean. Decisions are aligned. When it works, it really works.
Then there are the “odd” teams.
Some franchises hire a coach and general manager at the same time and tie them together from day one. When things go south, both are shown the door simultaneously. That approach isn’t ideal, but at least it’s consistent. Where it gets truly problematic is when a team fires one but keeps the other—and then expects the replacement to seamlessly fall in line.
Consider teams that retain the GM but fire the coach. In that scenario, the GM is effectively hiring someone who must operate within a philosophy they didn’t create—or worse, hiring someone who may ultimately answer to a person whose job security has already survived one failure. That’s a built-in conflict of interest, whether the league wants to acknowledge it or not. The new coach knows from day one who outlasted the last collapse, and that reality hovers over every disagreement, draft decision, and game plan.
Even stranger are organizations that split leadership entirely. Years ago, the Jets had both the head coach and the GM reporting directly to ownership—separately. No clear tiebreaker. No final authority. Just parallel power structures waiting to collide. Unsurprisingly, the results spoke for themselves.
Then there are teams that outsource confusion. The Atlanta Falcons recently hired two separate search firms—one to find a coach and another to find a GM—essentially building two visions at the same time and hoping they somehow merge into one. That’s not strategy. That’s wishful thinking.
What’s telling is that many of these franchises share something in common: a rough winning percentage over the last decade. That’s not a coincidence. Dysfunction at the top almost always shows up in the standings.
As a lawyer, I see the same principle play out in the legal world. When roles aren’t clearly defined, when authority is split, or when decision-makers have conflicting interests, the client pays the price. You can’t advocate effectively when strategy is compromised by politics or internal power struggles.
At Guendelsberger Law Offices, I don’t run cases that way. Every client deserves clarity—who’s responsible, what the plan is, and how it’s going to be executed. There’s no hidden hierarchy, no divided loyalties, and no guessing about who’s really in charge. My job is to advocate. Period.
That mindset comes straight from growing up on Philly sports. Tough cities demand tough structure. You don’t win by being cute. You win by being aligned, prepared, and accountable.
Whether it’s a football franchise trying to rebuild or someone facing a serious legal challenge, success starts with putting the right people in the right roles—and letting them do their jobs without conflicts muddying the water.
Because just like football, the law isn’t about chaos. It’s about execution.
If you need strong, straightforward legal advocacy, contact Guendelsberger Law Offices today. Let’s get the structure right—and start winning again.
