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!

     

Mike Zimmer to Redskins as DC rumor

Kevin Greene

By Kevin Greene,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Kevin Greene Newbie

Kevin Greene

Posted
Posted

Despite doing a great job over the past two seasons with the Cincinnati defense, Bengals defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer has yet to generate significant buzz as a potential head-coaching candidate for the upcoming carousel of vacancies.

But with his contract in Cincinnati set to expire after the current season, Zimmer could be in line for a lateral move -- and also a healthy raise.

We're told that Mike Shanahan has targeted Zimmer as the first choice to run the defense, if/when Shanahan resurfaces as head coach of the Redskins.

On Friday night, NFL Network's Jason La Canfora indicated that one of Mike Shanahan's first items of business will be to hire former Broncos defensive coordinator Bob Slowik. As La Canfora explained it, Slowik has been working with Shanahan at Denver-area office space. And we're hearing that Slowik will be a member of the Shanahan's staff even if Shanahan lands Zimmer.

Mr. Scot ain't gonna like this.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/12/26/zimmers-name-surfaces-as-potential-defensive-coordinator-in-dc/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boltergeist Newbie

Boltergeist

Posted
Posted

Step away from the large sums of money, Mr. Zimmer.

I'd hope this would be the wakeup call the Bengals need to get a new deal done with him. Given the way the team rallied around him when his wife died, I hope to see him still in CIN than to have to deal with Haney the Hemorrhoid.

Of course, there's also the new wrinkle regarding Shanahan and a certain job that opened up today, so this may be rendered moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

Actually, I was happy to hear it.

With an increasing feeling that John Fox was going to be back, I'd prefer that Zimmer still be an option next year if Fox should tank. Now with it confirmed that Fox is back, this is win-win.

If Fox makes it, well and good. If not, Zimmer could still be an option.

I doubt the same will be true of all the best options though (i.e. Rivera, Frazier and others).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      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.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      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...