Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

R.R. defends Bell & Chandler at presser


Jmac

Recommended Posts

Per J.Person. "They where playing well before injuries". Take it for what it's worth. I thought Chandler had a chance to improve after camp but he hasn't and Bell is Bell. Maybe he should ask Cam about how well they have been playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get you guys. We have no backup tackles and can't afford to get a good one. Do you expect him to keep shitting on them in pressers? What is that going to achieve? It will do nothing but break the teams morale. You put a brave face on it and when you have options you move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I don't know what to say. All I know is that as a manager, if I don't bold my team accountable, at some point I will be held accountable. I hope that holds true in this case as well.

You don't fire a staff member without an adequate replacement. That's bad management. Also you don't continually deride an employee for bad performance. None of us would enjoy working for a boss who is telling us everyday we suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These isn"t pee wee league football. Grown men making mega bucks that should be held accountable. At least don't BS and try to hide the obvious and say they are playing well....how about maybe "room for improvememt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't fire a staff member without an adequate replacement. That's bad management. Also you don't continually deride an employee for bad performance. None of us would enjoy working for a boss who is telling us everyday we suck.

 

This isn't some office job. Even these UDFA's are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to play this game. The "he's a nice guy though" reasoning for keeping clearly underperforming players around is a big part of why we've never had back to back winning seasons before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"KB needed to make that catch" - everyone flips out about calling him out.

"Bell and Chandler are being hampered by injuries and we have no back ups" - unacceptable to stand up for them.

 

Ron can only do so much with what he has... Dave can only get so many players at a time... Players can only be so good... Coaches can only teach so much. We are what we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned lining the TEs up in the backfield on obvious pass situations. What about Chandler? He is supposed to be super athletic for his size and obviously isn't a stranger to position changes. Why not line him up back there for pass protection or even as a normal fullback? Other than screens we aren't using the backs a safety valves anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...