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

6 minutes ago, ladypanther said:

Pretty expensive to live in San Fran...might take some extra cash to get him there.

Having lived in Cali in recent years, I also think it's a pretty crap city.  The best spots are across the bridge by Sausalito or far south outside town.  The actual city has really dipped in quality.  Even the trendy/cool neighborhoods for older millennial couples/young fams.  This is coming from a City Planner 🙂  Oakland is even looking better with the amount of improvements going on.   San Fran has just had such a disappointing trajectory after being a standard bearer in many ways in the early 00s.  Same goes for Portland.  

East coast & some of the resurgent midwest cities are what's up.  

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Bear Hands said:

Having lived in Cali in recent years, I also think it's a pretty crap city.  The best spots are across the bridge by Sausalito or far south outside town.  The actual city has really dipped in quality.  Even the trendy/cool neighborhoods for older millennial couples/young fams.  This is coming from a City Planner 🙂  Oakland is even looking better with the amount of improvements going on.   San Fran has just had such a disappointing trajectory after being a standard bearer in many ways in the early 00s.  Same goes for Portland.  

East coast & some of the resurgent midwest cities are what's up.  

 

When theres a poop app for your city, its over...

 

Dam shame, cause san fran truly is ultra comfy.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

No, Wilks was an interim HC.  It has to be HC or GM to get the comp pick. Coordinators and staffers don't count.

Did they not changed the rules(again?). It goes for corporate jobs now(i think)....lookup san fran and comp picks, they lead...got like 6 extra picks due. Like if you hire and its a promotion type of deal, I could be off, but rules changes happen soooo much now.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

No, Wilks was an interim HC.  It has to be HC or GM to get the comp pick. Coordinators and staffers don't count.

Someone else asked this, and apparently since a coach has been hired Wilks is no longer interim head coach and his title reverts back to DB coach.

So yeah, we would.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the reason?

From the article...

If you are to believe what people in Mobile are saying, it’s due to Kyler Murray — and it’s not because the quarterback has a large say in the matter.

Rather, many of the desired candidates don’t want to take the job knowing they’ll be tied to the hip of Murray for the next four seasons. Murray signed a five-year, $230 million contract in late August, and anyone who takes the Cardinals job will have no options in the foreseeable future at quarterback.

  • Beer 1
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...