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!

     

NFL Coaching News


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

That's been speculated prior to now, and it makes sense.

Vikings, Giants and Bears (oh my) all need to hire a GM.

Wait, what? 😳

Denver already had a good defense.

PFT is disputing this suggestion, saying their sources insist Stephen Ross still wants Watson.

And finally...

Dammit 😠

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

A lot of the best OC candidates will probably follow some of the newly hired head coaches to their destinations.

Because why shave your legs if it's just a quick cup of coffee, right?

Chances are any new OC coming here is getting one season and it's hit the bricks time.

Edited by Khyber53
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, L-TownCat said:

So if no “rockstar” OC is acquired, will Tepper stay true to his word and cut ties with this idiot?

Short answer, no. Too much money on the books to cut ties with Rhule right now. I believe Rhule gets a 3rd year with the understanding that the team must show significant improvement, if not the playoffs, or he’s out. Rhule is not going to take an OC that will make him look over his shoulder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

That's been speculated prior to now, and it makes sense.

Vikings, Giants and Bears (oh my) all need to hire a GM.

Wait, what? 😳

Denver already had a good defense.

PFT is disputing this suggestion, saying their sources insist Stephen Ross still wants Watson.

And finally...

Dammit 😠

Look on the bright side…if the Texans hire Flores, it we’ll finally be out of the Deshaun Watson sweepstakes. 😜

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prowler2k18 said:

Short answer, no. Too much money on the books to cut ties with Rhule right now. I believe Rhule gets a 3rd year with the understanding that the team must show significant improvement, if not the playoffs, or he’s out. Rhule is not going to take an OC that will make him look over his shoulder. 

The ultimatum was a rockstar OC.  Unless that was just noise to quiet the mob.

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

    • 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...