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!

     

Steve Smith on the Wilks vs Reich debate


methodtoll
 Share

Recommended Posts

If Wilks really was adamant about Holcomb returning as DC I wouldn't be surprised. Great culture guy but also kinda stuck in his ways Rivera style. Reich seems more open to evolving with the rest of the NFL, and also has more connections. That would probably sway me towards Reich also if I were the owner. Duce Staley is already gonna replace some of that energy Wilks brought and won't be surprised if he's in line to take over HC eventually 

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Krovvy said:

The Matt Rhule stories right after. 🤡

Damn talking to the ticket office, picking which players can do media haha. What a fuging clown. Asking players to watch tape in the locker room an hour before the game? Too late dork everything is already dialed in, dudes are trying to get their minds right to hit people for 3 hours straight. That was the best little 5 mins of this 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Please let Steve Wilks live his life peacefully.

 

People wanted him gone yet they still want to discuss him. Let it go people.

I just thought it was interesting hearing a former player's perspective... That was simply it... And for the record, most Wilks supporters cannot let it go either

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JawnyBlaze said:

The other guy don’t k ow the Panthers. He’s probably never watched a Panthers regular season game in his life. Every answer was “I don’t remember that game”. Of course you don’t, you didn’t watch it. “They were a dead team” “give coach Wilks some good players and see what he can do”. He had a bunch of good players. There is talent all over the defense, the unit he made worse when he took over, and in addition to a very good line there’s a few good players on the offense too. This guy just reads headlines and makes opinions off of that. Total clown. 

Yeah that guy didn't know sh-t.

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

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...