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!

     

Honestly... Ron Rivera is a bad head coach.


Mage

Recommended Posts

This is not an overreaction to just this game.  With that said, the ending of that game made Rivera's problems shine.

Even if you want to blame Mike Shula, Rivera is the one who is responsible for having him hired.  Why in the world so close to the 2 minute warning are we running the ball 3 straight times?  It wasn't a short yardage 3rd down situation either.  Meanwhile, you have Benjamin and Olsen who have killed the Bucs all night.  Anderson has made some mistakes but we didn't need a touchdown; just a field goal.  We gave up.

We went 15-1 last year, but how many of those big leads did we choke away due to getting severely outcoached after halftime?  A bunch of them.  Rivera doesn't know how to manage a clock ie. tonight.  He doesn't know how to adjust ie. almost every game.  And now his team looks lifeless.  The only thing he ever had going for him was keeping his guys motivated.

I know I'm probably going to be in the minority, but I see no reason to have Rivera on a long leash.  The coaching problems with this team from 2011 still exist in 2016.  Losing tonight wouldn't have been as big of a deal in another fashion (still would have hurt), but the way we just lost?  It just shows how delusional Rivera is as a coach.  We just lost to a team that basically gave up on a drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Rivera needs to can Shula. It's Rivera's fault Shula is still here. I still think Rivera is above average, he just has a OC that brings down everything. He lets the OC do what he wants. It's up to Rivera to realize Shula isn't the answer and to move on. If Rivera continues to choose loyalty over what's in the best interest of the team, Rivera is the one that should be looking for another job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rivera believes the players Gettleman gave him are not costing the team. This is sad.

I expect a HC to take it on his shoulders when the team hits a critical point like 1-4. Nope. Rivera throws it on the players. He will lose the team this year, and Gettleman set him up.

Gettleman is the biggest culprit for the product on that field. The depth sucks. The players Gettleman want starting suck.

Cut Ealy, Klein, Boston, Teddy Williams, and Funchess right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron Rivera has switched between being a gutless inept wimp, and a ballsy go for the jugular gambler in season so many times here that I've lost count. I don't think at this point that the switch will ever flip on, and stay on. Cold hard truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Rivera needs to can Shula. It's Rivera's fault Shula is still here. I still think Rivera is above average, he just has a OC that brings down everything. He lets the OC do what he wants. It's up to Rivera to realize Shula isn't the answer and to move on. If Rivera continues to choose loyalty over what's in the best interest of the team, Rivera is the one that should be looking for another job. 


This. Shula is god awful.


Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree that we have never really changed from a coaching perspective.  Our flaws in the wins were still very apparent last season.  This is what happens when players coat deficiencies and they got comfortable is a faulty system.  

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...