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 Theory- The Buyout


Dpantherman

Recommended Posts

Interesting article from profootballtalk.com:

We mentioned last night the possibility that the Panthers have opted to bring back coach John Fox because of a possible lockout in 2011.

Jason La Canfora of NFL Network has another theory that makes plenty of sense to us -- the Panthers might be trying to get Fox to leave without owing him the full $6 million he's due to receive in 2010....

Read the entire story here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lame duck angle of this story specifically aimed at Fox seems wrong to me. It seems that the plan for contracts of coaching personnel has been in place since last year (actually since Fox signed his extension). We didn't retain the entire defensive coaching staff except for a secondary coach. McCoy left as well. The reporting at the time stated the coaches were offered contracts, but chose to leave because of the length of the contracts they were offered in most cases. This is not anything new to those who work in the building IMO. Replacements were hired with contracts that expire before the lockout year. I think the plan is to keep Fox for until the lockout and retool the staff after the lockout if necessary. This buyout/unnamed source stuff sounds like an agent stirring the pot to me.

I would like to know how many other nfl coaches are in the last year of their contract. I think any well run franchise might approach the possibility of a lockout in the same mannner. Especially if they thought chances were in favor of a lockout. :( JR and co. are in a position to know better than most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OG article

That puts Fox in a predicament, and I would not be surprised if his representation tries to find a way to reach a settlement that allows Fox to become a free agent of sorts. Simply quitting, and walking away from roughly $6 million in 2009, and being unable to coach elsewhere in the NFL, would be a lot to walk away from. But coaching out a lame-duck year without a mandate or pulpit to forge a team and lead men is far from ideal as well

http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/12/28/carolina-situation-not-ideal-for-fox/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If JR wanted him gone then he'd fire his ass. There isn't time to waste with mind games when you are trying to get another coach in there to take over.

If Fox isn't gone in 2 weeks then he's not going to be gone at all...

You dont show your cards at the begging of the game. If they are trying to get Fox to leave then ever who they have a replacement already know what the deal is. Give it til the end of January and if Fox is still here he will be here for next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider Philly well run organization and they just extended Reid.
I think Philly is one of two teams that is not planning on pulling it's pension plan. Here are a couple of quotes from the article that led me to believe that.

National Football Post

The pension problem has some NFL coaches looking to catch on with teams like the Eagles, who take good care of their coaches, have a pension and have a leader like coach Andy Reid, who has juice with the owner.

To date, nine teams have decided to discontinue retirement funding for their coaching staffs. All benefits earned through 2008 are funded and are earned by all coaches with those nine teams.

Kennan believes that all teams, with the possible exception of two, will phase out their coaches’ pensions over the next two years

It looks like most teams are trying to deal with the lockout by reducing salaries.

Language for work-stoppage-related salary reductions started creeping into coaches’ contracts about two years ago. Currently, management is asking coaches to accept salary reductions of 50-75 percent of their 2011 salaries, depending on the length of a possible work stoppage.

I think the Panthers' plan is different from the above in that they have decided to simply have the coaching staff's contracts expire before the lockout and pay 0%.

There is some pretty serious unrest in the coaching ranks, wanting to unionize, etc. Some coaches may see the lockout as an opportunity to change their situation, although in the current climate I see the number of proven big name coaches not getting rehired as a message ownership is sending to them about unionization. I'm sure there is pressure from Fox's colleagues to "make a stand" about his situation, but I don't think he has the leverage when you evaluate the entire 2009 performance of the team.

The part I don't like is how it detracts from the football side of things. That's all I truly care about. To wit, I think Fox could well have been fired this year if labor troubles weren't looming ahead. Fired or not, I want whatever decisions are made by ownership to be about putting the best package of coaches/players on the field to win games, not to cover your ass because there might be a lockout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...