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!

     

New Coach Thread 2: Electric Boogaloo


Ricky Spanish
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, therealmjl said:

Wilks isn't attracting good assistant coaches in the first place. 

Here's an alternative:

Tepper: Wilks, I don't think we're going to hire you.

Wilks: Ok.

Tepper: Best of luck.

---

A 2 year deal is more than fair for Steve Wilks.

Glad you will NEVER be in a position to hire coaches EVER. lollll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Giving a minority candidate less than a standard coaching deal?

I'm guessing the lawyers for Wilks and Brian Flores would probably have something to say about that.

Yea...a 2 year contract?  Hmmmm...what coach will be available at that time without having to pay his former team compensation?  Not happening.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can put 3-4 years down on a piece of paper but it doesn't mean anything when everyone in the world knows that if Wilks is hired he's on a year by year evaluation because he already has experience failing as a HC in the NFL.  I don't care if Tepper gives him a 20 year deal - it's not my money and has no effect on the allocation of the salary cap.

The book is out on him. He would need to do "an incredible job" to maintain any type of job security.

Edited by therealmjl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ladypanther said:

Tepper: OK,  Wilks, we could not find anyone we really liked (who would come here) so we  are giving you 1 (or 2 years) because we are hoping that someone we like better will be available later on.

Wilkes: No thank you.

How are you going to attract good assistant coaches or even free agents in a situation like that even if he did accept?

Not a good plan.

Sounds even crazier when you put it that way LP. I’m not sure anyone could believe that deal would make sense. I’m certainly glad some of these armchair GM’s aren’t making this decision.

Something else I heard on Kyle Bailey that we should all think about - no one ever heard of Nick Sirianni when he was hired a few years ago. His first press conference was forgettable at best and I’m sure everyone thought the Eagles played themselves. Two years late - he’s got them on the verge of their 2nd SB. Lesson? Sometimes the right guy is not the one everyone wants or the sexy hires. The Panthers absolutely need to nail this one, whoever it is.

Edited by Prowler2k18
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Its going to be hilarious when he turns us down and goes back to Philly.

 

I don't think people realize our team isn't that attractive without a QB. 

this team sabotages itself by not committing one way or the other 

they scoff and hiss at the idea of tanking but when wanna be treated like a primo landing spot for potential coaches with no viable path to a QB

teams aren’t being evaluated on how many promising “defensive cornerstones” they have now-the coach in question wants a QB or wants a clear path to a QB.

he doesn’t want to come in and “prove there are other ways to win” or to “build from the ground up”

he wants a quarterback. 

this team won’t commit to being bad and has been too timid to commit to being good so they just flounder around and struggle in this awkward middle stage where nothing changes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, therealmjl said:

@ladypantherhow's this:

Tepper: Wilks, we interviewed 20 candidates because we weren't sold on you. After careful consideration (and the fact that our top 3-4 choices decided to either stick with their current team or declined the position), we'd like to offer you the job. 4 year deal? Do we have a deal?

Wilks: Yes!

😂😂😂

Couldn’t help but chuckle at this one. Wilks understands the game. He’s rightfully giving this process time to play out. If not, he doesn’t deserve to be a HC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just more of players/coaches not wanting to come here because they want to win. That’s why you see this locker room fighting for Wilks hiring. They’re the players that put $ over winning and want to keep the gravy train rolling while putting in low effort. 

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No matter what we still need a QB2 with potential to be a QB1. Keep throwing QBs at the wall until we find someone who sticks.
    • Lot of different agendas dictating opinions.  I don’t think it was the best use of money with Hunt, specifically, but the concept of OL, I am a fan. I didn’t complain a ton because I am a believer in winning up front, on both sides of the ball. I’d rather have stout fronts than fancy WRs. I have complained some about Hunt not being worth his deal, after seeing him get pushed around in a game or two. It’s no crusade. And have complained in the context of shorting the defense.   They have leveled out the FA imbalance with the dual big signings this offseason, and it has always been the draft picks I am most protective of. Anyway The picks are the real imbalance. If you did a trade chart value of the picks we directly gave up for Bryce, and added the support picks invested for skill players, and put that on one side… then put the little 3 3rd rounders and a 2nd that the defense got over three years on the other it would be hugely out of balance. I just want the balance restored. Defense is still owed.    
    • I'm one of the ones that won't let it go because it didn't solve the problem. We didn't address the center position which was a huge mistake. We were in position to easily take 2 or the top IOL. Instead of drafting JPJ over XL or Frazier over Brooks, we relied on an oft injured guard to center conversion and lo and behold, it failed as predicted. XL looks like a 1 year college wonder and an injured Brooks hasn't even surpassed Eric Shelton.  Bryce was also benched for poor performance, so the issue that many claimed was solely bad oline play wasn't. It didn't fix him bailing out of tight pockets because of being unable to see the field or him refusing to work on his atrocious footwork. Then there's the $$$. Lewis got a good guard payday. Hunt got a tackle payday. Pay tackles, draft guards, if you can.  I have no issues addressing problems through FA. It was not addressing C at all that's been the issue and still has been. Ryan Kalil was the anchor of our offensive line. We had years of solid center play and it showed. Now we're still piecemealing the center position with an expensive oline and it's still a shitshow. Why? Because the player responsible for what happens on the line presnap has little to no experience doing it. We did acquire a FA center this year finally. We'll see how much that impacts the line.  Spending on a center, whether it be through draft or FA is not bad. It's not a position that can have anyone just thrown in with no drop off in performance. A great center lifts the play of the guards on each side.  I don't like how we've built the line because we've ignored the hinge pin that everyone counts on every play. And the reality of the situation is, it didn't solve the actual problems with Bryce because those have nothing to do with the oline. 
×
×
  • Create New...