12-09-2022, 08:51 AM
(12-09-2022, 08:18 AM)washingtonismoney Wrote:(12-09-2022, 08:04 AM)BostonCard Wrote: I would add Garrett’s statement was fine, and he probably had to put out something after letting it be so public.
I think it's the timing that doesn't sit well -- right after all the build-up. A few reporters immediately reacted as if Garrett was withdrawing from consideration. So it looks like brand management: not Garrett being rejected, but Garrett doing the rejecting. Fair enough, I suppose, but I do think it's a bit petty.
I think the error was in the build-up not the climb-down. It is possible that the relative buzz on the three candidates reflects their relative pecking order. That Garrett was the top choice, Taylor was next, and Brennan was eliminated early, and that Stanford and Garrett just couldn’t agree on terms. It’s also possible that the relative buzz has come from the candidates themselves, and that Garrett thought he had it in the bag (or was campaigning for it via proxies) despite merely being one of the finalists.
This sort of thing happens often enough that it’s not that big a deal. The only issue is that it’s not like Garrett can point to a shiny new contract in his current position to make it look like his offer was matched.
BC
