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!

     

How about Steve Wilkes?


WarHeel
 Share

Recommended Posts

Honestly Wilks called a better game than Shannahan. Kyle abandoned the run, for who knows what reason and the offense with the turn overs was just not helping. Also the special teams giving mahomes that short yardage TD...I mean Wilks adjusted but it was too much in the end. Too many bad turn overs that they couldn't stop the bleeding. But that ending was just bleh..

HOnestly I don't blame Wilks, there were some questionable calls on him, like rushing/blitzing when the 4 man rush was actually working and no spy on Mahomes really did them in.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

Honestly Wilks called a better game than Shannahan. Kyle abandoned the run, for who knows what reason and the offense with the turn overs was just not helping. Also the special teams giving mahomes that short yardage TD...I mean Wilks adjusted but it was too much in the end. Too many bad turn overs that they couldn't stop the bleeding. But that ending was just bleh..

HOnestly I don't blame Wilks, there were some questionable calls on him, like rushing/blitzing when the 4 man rush was actually working and no spy on Mahomes really did them in.

That was a hell of a defensive game 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Never, ever celebrate too early, folks 😖

I stand firm on the title. That loss had little to do with Wilkes and much more to do with special teams blunders. Also of note, Chiefs went multiple quarters without a penalty. Go figure. 

Edited by WarHeel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

Honestly Wilks called a better game than Shannahan. Kyle abandoned the run, for who knows what reason and the offense with the turn overs was just not helping. Also the special teams giving mahomes that short yardage TD...I mean Wilks adjusted but it was too much in the end. Too many bad turn overs that they couldn't stop the bleeding. But that ending was just bleh..

HOnestly I don't blame Wilks, there were some questionable calls on him, like rushing/blitzing when the 4 man rush was actually working and no spy on Mahomes really did them in.

Shanahan actually had to call a time out because he saw Wilks had called a Cover 0 against a formation / situation where it would have been highly dangerous.

(Romo called it out from the announce booth)

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Butterflyj30 said:

I don't think Wilks lost the game if the extra kick hadn't been blocked they would have won

He didn’t. The usual suspects have been mouth breathing and salivating for the NFL script to drop so they could come in here touting how right they were about Steve.

  • 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

    • 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.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...