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!

     

Kyle Bailey says Tepper isnt happy, wants changes now.


CPF4LIFE
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I think we have a problem and it's bigger than Reich. Or Fitterer. Or Bryce Young. Or any other coach, player, or front office personnel. Ever since Tepper started "putting his stamp on the football side of the house" (I think that's the verbiage he used) after focusing on the business side of operations in year one, everything has been a series of comedies of errors. Tepper gets involved and makes a bold decision and proudly announces it to the world. Everything goes to poo. Tepper disappears. Tepper reappears to announce another bold move. Everything goes to poo. Tepper disappears. It's a recurring theme.

Fixed. 

D54971D4-7839-435B-81AF-6E4EA10454AD.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

She doesn't have any qualifications and neither does Dave, but they own the team.  I know Tepper is the current owner, but Nicole is part of his family and holds a position.  The Steelers have Anthony Rooney as a Scouting Intern, Dan Rooney Jr as VP of Player Personnel, Arthur Rooney Jr as VP and Arthur Rooney II (which is different than Jr for whatever reason) as the President.  

Holy fug dude you need to do some research on the rooneys if you are going to use them as an example compared to nicole.  Which rooney do you have a problem with holding a position?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Khaki Lackey said:

Yeah yeah, forgive me for not remembering sh!t about The Eagles from 6 years ago. Reich's record in Indy was still better than the last 4 coaches we've had here.

I don’t think that means much now. He will be 0-6 come the bye and I don’t see us beating the Texans or Colts. So 0-8. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Holy fug dude you need to do some research on the rooneys if you are going to use them as an example compared to nicole.  Which rooney do you have a problem with holding a position?

Completely missed the point. I have no problem with the Rooney’s and I’m showing you that other owners also let their family have positions. Sometimes to the good. @frankwcaught on pretty easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForJimmy said:

Completely missed the point. I have no problem with the Rooney’s and I’m showing you that other owners also let their family have positions. Sometimes to the good. @frankwcaught on pretty easy.

they worked for them and gained experience, nicole was simply given the role with absolutely no background or work experience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

they worked for them and gained experience, nicole was simply given the role with absolutely no background or work experience

They were given jobs to get experience because of their family.  It's really not that uncommon in the workplace.  Especially when there is no board and the company is owned by one person or family.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForJimmy said:

They were given jobs to get experience because of their family.  It's really not that uncommon in the workplace.  Especially when there is no board and the company is owned by one person or family.  

Which rooney do you have an issue with?  Because I am seeing them start at the bottom and work their way up.  You know gaining valuable experience.  Nicole was simply given the job and allowed to come and give input on coaches and pro days.   She doesnt need to be there.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

Which rooney do you have an issue with?  Because I am seeing them start at the bottom and work their way up.  You know gaining valuable experience.  Nicole was simply given the job and allowed to come and give input on coaches and pro days.   She doesnt need to be there.

I don't have an issue with any of them.  I am using them to show it isn't a big of a deal that Nicole has a position with the team.  Robert Kraft's son Jonathan immediately became VP, Vice Chairman, and now President of the Patriots.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I don't have an issue with any of them.  I am using them to show it isn't a big of a deal that Nicole has a position with the team.  Robert Kraft's son Jonathan immediately became VP, Vice Chairman, and now President of the Patriots.  

alright how about this.  Its not a big deal for her to work at Tepper sports.  It is however a big deal that she is given input on coach hirings, qb selections and draft day trades.  Would you agree with that statement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, tukafan21 said:

If Reich didn't want Bryce, I'm 100% on board with firing both Reich and Fitterer today, literally TODAY

How can you hire a new HC, then trade away the franchise's future to take an undersized and under skilled QB that he didn't even want?

That would just be an utter failure on all accounts, fire Fitterer for taking Bryce and fire Reich for allowing him to take Bryce (if the HC really didn't want him, he could have stopped it and forced our hand to Stroud).

This is the kind of crap Steve Wilks had to deal with in Arizona and subsequently that record was and experience is why many here acted like he was a pariah!

  • Pie 2
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

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...