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!

     

House Money (Dear Coach Rivera)


Kevin Greene

Recommended Posts

Dear Coach Rivera,

Crazy the way things work sometimes and what do you know we got lucky and made our way into the Tournament when for quite some time that looked like an impossibility. We put our money down on 59 black and damned if it didn't hit.

 

Well guess what, were playing with house money now and it's time to go a little crazy. That conservative instinct you're feeling entering Playoff week one? Brush it aside. Be bold, take a chance, tell Shula to light it up, blitz a little more, go for it. Trust your offense and defense to make the plays on the field. They've stood by you during this entire season and never quit so pay them back and let them do what they're capable of. 

Trust the luck, don't look back and take no prisoners.

 

Good Luck, God Speed,

Teh Huddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After failing to score on 4th and goal last year against SF, I doubt Rivera ever gambles in a situation like that again.

All I ask is that they let Cam be Cam!

 

That was the right call and 10 out of 10 times he should make the same call.  The SECOND time they got stuff I have no idea why they didn't play-action pass to Olsen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After failing to score on 4th and goal last year against SF, I doubt Rivera ever gambles in a situation like that again.

All I ask is that they let Cam be Cam!

 

If it is 4th and goal and it's the playoffs, you should go for it more times than not. Settling for a chip shot FG might work against a team like Arizona, but even if they fail they have to face our D backed up in a tough situation. We just can't let them have a big run that changes the dynamic of the game like we have a couple times this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you guys honestly think Rivera will untuck his sack if presented this same situation Saturday?

History says he doesn't. He was basically in the same situation later that quarter when it was 4th and goal on the SF 2 and he kicked the FG. I hate settling for FG's and would like to see the ball in Cam's hands every time in that spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you guys honestly think Rivera will untuck his sack if presented this same situation Saturday?

History says he doesn't. He was basically in the same situation later that quarter when it was 4th and goal on the SF 2 and he kicked the FG. I hate settling for FG's and would like to see the ball in Cam's hands every time in that spot.

^^^This, its worth risking the 3pts for a chance to either score or make them get the ball back at their own 1, why not go for it in those situations is beyond me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you guys honestly think Rivera will untuck his sack if presented this same situation Saturday?

History says he doesn't. He was basically in the same situation later that quarter when it was 4th and goal on the SF 2 and he kicked the FG. I hate settling for FG's and would like to see the ball in Cam's hands every time in that spot.

 

They finally realized there was a QB bootleg in the playbook a couple weeks ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the game might be close so actually I think that field goals may very well decide the game.  So going for it on 4th and 1 may not be the best thing on Saturday.  Particularly if it rains and points are a premium.  That is the problem with folks here they often make blanket statements when most things in life are actually situational calls and depend on the circumstances.

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...