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!

     

Business Culture


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

So a reporter asked Matt Rhule today if he thought it would be fair to ask Teddy Bridgewater to mentor Sam Darnold.

Rhule's response?

"I don't really believe in fair or unfair in professional sports."

Loosely translated: "I don't give a sh-t."

 

Ron Rivera always wanted to help be sure players ended their careers on their best terms. Matt Rhule doesn't really seem to be especially worried about that. He appears to be more of a "do whatever it takes to win" guy.

I'm curious which approach fans are more comfortable with.

What a breath of fresh air coach Rhule is

pro athletes get paid multi millions...perform as we need you to or you are gone....just love it

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think its as simple as some on here are making it sound. 

Some back up QB's (Anderson for example) have extended their careers because of their willingness to do this.. some choose not to.

Really the choice is up to Teddy. Teddy will have to decide if he thinks he can be QB1 or if he wasn't to reside as a high-end back up option. 

If he thinks he can be QB1 then I expect he will use every advantage he has to be better than Sam including not sharing the 'trade secrets'. Worst case he gets cut, gets paid and try's to get onto another team.

But honestly his best option would be to bring along Sam. Earn a reputation of being a good teammate and try to get a 10 year back up career out of the deal.. 

 

But I wouldn't blame the guy if he was an ass to Sam.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

It affects roster decisions.

Lord knows it did with Ron.

The question you posed was black and white but I believe it’s a gray issue. NFL teams are a business and the fans are consumers. Handling a release like DG did Steve Smith and Josh Norman sours the sweetness for some fans. Not many will care if Bridgewater has his feelings hurt though. 

Edited by WarHeel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So when FA players chase the money 99% of the time are they more worried about their team’s feelings or business?

That’s the issue - players never want to hear the screwed over a team by doing this yet the real butthurt comes out when a franchise let’s them go.

It truly is a business just like any job - the it’s a family atmospheres where they keep a shitty employee because of anything other than business are fuging hell to work for, no thanks.

Fans say but what about player relations? I say yea what about the relations with the younger, promising players who get fuged with zero playing time because of a vet/fan favorite bias? 

Lord knows Rivera and Fox to a lesser extent had some long ass lists of those. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

So a reporter asked Matt Rhule today if he thought it would be fair to ask Teddy Bridgewater to mentor Sam Darnold.

Rhule's response?

"I don't really believe in fair or unfair in professional sports."

Loosely translated: "I don't give a sh-t."

 

Ron Rivera always wanted to help be sure players ended their careers on their best terms. Matt Rhule doesn't really seem to be especially worried about that. He appears to be more of a "do whatever it takes to win" guy.

I'm curious which approach fans are more comfortable with.

Terrific response 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m all for it. You can preach we are family but at the end of the day players(like Olsen) are going to do what’s in their best interest...even after everything the team does for them. Play well or kick rocks. I don’t care if you win nice guy of the year every year. It’s nice to behave like a professional sports team and not a Sunday school. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, onmyown said:

So when FA players chase the money 99% of the time are they more worried about their team’s feelings or business?

That’s the issue - players never want to hear the screwed over a team by doing this yet the real butthurt comes out when a franchise let’s them go.

It truly is a business just like any job - the it’s a family atmospheres where they keep a shitty employee because of anything other than business are fuging hell to work for, no thanks.

Fans say but what about player relations? I say yea what about the relations with the younger, promising players who get fuged with zero playing time because of a vet/fan favorite bias? 

Lord knows Rivera and Fox to a lesser extent had some long ass lists of those. 

Are you okay? Why do you have so much anger for players who are the ones actually risking themselves for entertainment and not the billionaires who hold fans over a barrel with things like psls whether the franchise is good or bad? On top of all that the same billionaires expect taxpayers to foot the bill for what amounts to a gigantic billion dollar amusement park.

  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CanadianCat said:

I dont think its as simple as some on here are making it sound. 

Some back up QB's (Anderson for example) have extended their careers because of their willingness to do this.. some choose not to.

Really the choice is up to Teddy. Teddy will have to decide if he thinks he can be QB1 or if he wasn't to reside as a high-end back up option. 

If he thinks he can be QB1 then I expect he will use every advantage he has to be better than Sam including not sharing the 'trade secrets'. Worst case he gets cut, gets paid and try's to get onto another team.

But honestly his best option would be to bring along Sam. Earn a reputation of being a good teammate and try to get a 10 year back up career out of the deal.. 

 

But I wouldn't blame the guy if he was an ass to Sam.. 

it doesn’t matter what teddy does...Sam is our QB

what is Sam going to learn from the guy he is replacing...and who cares?

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, frankw said:

Are you okay? Why do you have so much anger for players who are the ones actually risking themselves for entertainment and not the billionaires who hold fans over a barrel with things like psls whether the franchise is good or bad? On top of all that the same billionaires expect taxpayers to foot the bill for what amounts to a gigantic billion dollar amusement park.

Seriously?...these players get paid millions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...