Rhule and Fitterer out of synch on bringing in a Veteran QB (e.g. Mayfield)?

[Davidson Deac II]

12 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

Fitterer literally said they are still looking at veteran options in his interview 48hrs ago. The same interview that the parallel thread is talking about fitterer mentioning the potential of bringing cam back. 
 

this is a non story/assumption.

I agree, this seems to be nit picking everything the front office says.  Of course they are looking at bringing in veterans.  As they should be.  We had Cam in his prime and still brought in Derek Anderson.  Got a pretty good backup out of the deal.  If the right deal comes along, we should take it.  If not, then we roll with what we have.  

Edited May 15, 2022 by Davidson Deac II

[Mr. Scot]

10 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

“Coach speak” vs “real speak” are two very different concepts 

You actually just strengthened my point.

Go back and listen to the interviews Fitterer gave before the draft. You'll hear him clearly state that building around a rookie quarterback is "the right way to do it" but then hedge that they're "open to all options".

It's not hard to see the dynamics.

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

You actually just strengthened my point.

Go back and listen to the interviews Fitterer gave before the draft. You'll hear him clearly state that building around a rookie quarterback is "the right way to do it" but then hedge that they're "open to all options".

It's not hard to see the dynamics.

Are we agreement fighting again? This feels like another one of those situations where you and I are saying the same thing but differently….

 

[OceanPanther]

I hope we don't bring in another QB unless one of the 3 we have now gets hurts..  
Like many of you,, we want to see what we have in Corral .  No , I don't want him to start week 1.

Unless we can get rid of Darnold and  HIS CONTRACT,  I want him to start  behind this simi new O Line, and see what we have. If he succeeds, so be it. If  he's mediocre at best,  then we get to see an early start with Corral. 

Get PJ Walker off this team. We've seen him.  He's not  a Derek Anderson. 

It's Time to move on from PJ on this roster

Edited May 15, 2022 by OceanPanther

[Mr. Scot]

29 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Are we agreement fighting again? This feels like another one of those situations where you and I are saying the same thing but differently….

I'd say we probably agree about as much as Fitterer and Rhule.

Bottom Line: Yes, I think Fitterer would prefer to build for the long term around a young quarterback. Rhule however can't afford to think long term. He needs the team to show improvement now in order to justify keeping him as head coach. Building around a rookie isn't conducive to that.

As has been attested, Fitterer may have increased power but Rhule still has final say. Thus, Fitterer will (at least publicly) defer to what Rhule wants.

He'll publicly say that they're on the same page, just like they'll publicly say that every player they drafted was the exact guy that they were targeting all along.

Edited May 15, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[TheCasillas]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say we probably agree about as much as Fitterer and Rhule.

Bottom Line: Yes, I think Fitterer would prefer to build for the long term around a young quarterback. Rhule however can't afford to think long term. He needs the team to show improvement now in order to justify keeping him as head coach. Building around a rookie isn't conducive to that.

As has been attested, Fitterer may have increased power but Rhule still has final say. Thus, Fitterer will (at least publicly) defer to what Rhule wants.

He'll publicly say that they're on the same page, just like they'll publicly say that every player they drafted was the exact guy that they were targeting all along.

We are on the same page, and from outside looking in  the assessment is as best as it could be. I think we are going to walk away with a different impression once the draft BTS video is released. As Gantt or Fowler wrote (can’t remember which) it was fitterer and Rhule who looked at each other and said “do it” when it was time to trade for the pick to get corral. 

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

We are on the same page, and from outside looking in  the assessment is as best as it could be. I think we are going to walk away with a different impression once the draft BTS video is released. As Gantt or Fowler wrote (can’t remember which) it was fitterer and Rhule who looked at each other and said “do it” when it was time to trade for the pick to get corral. 

I don't necessarily think they disagree on Corral.

The question of whether or not we also need a veteran? That I'm less sure of.

[Pejorative Miscreant]

To borrow a phrase from a previous GM. If we are looking for a vet Fitt isn’t shopping hungry. 

[Luciu5]

46 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say we probably agree about as much as Fitterer and Rhule.

Bottom Line: Yes, I think Fitterer would prefer to build for the long term around a young quarterback. Rhule however can't afford to think long term. He needs the team to show improvement now in order to justify keeping him as head coach. Building around a rookie isn't conducive to that.

As has been attested, Fitterer may have increased power but Rhule still has final say. Thus, Fitterer will (at least publicly) defer to what Rhule wants.

He'll publicly say that they're on the same page, just like they'll publicly say that every player they drafted was the exact guy that they were targeting all along.

Rhule has final say, but does he have authority to terminate Fitterer? I'd bet no. Thus Fitterer has the ability to tell Rhule no IF Tepper is in his corner. I think "Rhule has final say" is both true and not true at the same time. It comes down to Tepper and I think Fitterer has Teppers backing at this point.

[TheCasillas]

33 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't necessarily think they disagree on Corral.

The question of whether or not we also need a veteran? That I'm less sure of.

I think it’s fair to assume both Fitt and Rhule are in alignment about adding a vet. I also believe it would be a good idea to add a vet.
 

My preference is Jimmy G followed by Fitzpatrick. 

[Mr. Scot]

14 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

I think it’s fair to assume both Fitt and Rhule are in alignment about adding a vet. I also believe it would be a good idea to add a vet.

My preference is Jimmy G followed by Fitzpatrick. 

Define alignment.

If "I don't really think we should do that but you've got final say so I'll go along and won't make waves" is alignment, then sure.

[Mr. Scot]

20 minutes ago, Luciu5 said:

Rhule has final say, but does he have authority to terminate Fitterer? I'd bet no. Thus Fitterer has the ability to tell Rhule no IF Tepper is in his corner. I think "Rhule has final say" is both true and not true at the same time. It comes down to Tepper and I think Fitterer has Teppers backing at this point.

Pretty sure Rhule does not have the authority to fire Fitterer, or anybody else not on his coaching staff.

I don't know if I'd go as far as to say Tepper has chosen one over the other, but the general consensus is that Fitterer has more power than he did before.

[poundaway]

19 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Pretty sure Rhule does not have the authority to fire Fitterer, or anybody else not on his coaching staff.

I don't know if I'd go as far as to say Tepper has chosen one over the other, but the general consensus is that Fitterer has more power than he did before.

I would agree that only Tepper can fire Fitterer, though we know that Rhule pushed Hurney out.  In the end though, Tepper fired Hurney.

As for the "consensus" on the Fitterer "has more power", I believe that's arguable.  I would say at best its myth promoted by Rhule-haters trying to find an explanation for the good off-season we've had without giving Rhule any credit.  Tepper has stated the exact opposite, Rhule's contract has NOT changed and most of the supporting evidence is glances, pauses, and off base read-between-the-line bs.  Its the Huddle's Qanon.

[poundaway]

31 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Define alignment.

If "I don't really think we should do that but you've got final say so I'll go along and won't make waves" is alignment, then sure.

If Fit doesn't think we should get a QB and he has all this new power, why doesn't he just say, we're not getting a vet QB?

It was collaborative last year.   It is again this year, and Rhules contract has not changed.