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!

     

There is only one Coach that will keep butts in the seats next year


Jangler

Recommended Posts

Yeah, and we are not winning now and it is looking like we might not win a game ths season. The team has been decimated mentally. The fans are pissed and becoming Colts fans or whatever team.

I never said another coach couldn't come in and win. What I am saying is Cowher as coach means those butts never leave to come back later.

I think that's true to a degree. A Super Bowl winning coach will attract more people on Sundays and probably keep them coming for a little longer during a losing season. But I don't know if I would blow money on going to see a 3-10 team play in December regardless of who the coach is. With picking the next head coach I wouldn't think about the name, I would would pick who is most likely to put winning seasons together. Any city will support a winner, except Tampa Bay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took Bill Cowher a decade and a half to win a Super Bowl with the fuging Steelers. Please...god, no, we mind as well keep Fox.

Never EVER EVER put Bill Cowher and John Fox in the same sentence like this! I don't know who is the next head coach and at this point I don't care so long as it isn't Fox!

You say it took Cowher a decade and a half to win a Super Bowl? Fair enough. But he still accomplished something 90% of coaches will NEVER do!

To add to that, the man missed the PLAYOFFS 3 or 4 years out of 15 in a much tougher AFC...Fox can't even put together back to back winning seasons more less back to back playoff years!

These two coaches have NOTHING IN COMMON besides neither one has ever had a "great" QB!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you guys REALLY think BIll Cowher will turn this team into a winner, and how fast? A year? 2? 3? It will be Joe Gibbs version 2.0 people. Remember Gibbs with the Skins? He had a few nice years, went to the playoffs, and did nothing.

Cowher never had a great QB because he never developed a great QB. Running the ball and playing defense isn't going to work anymore....THATS WHAT WE DO NOW for heavens sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, Cowhers style is just as outdated as Fox. Look at the NFL...the teams that are winning have young coaches, or coaches that aren't afraid to throw the damn ball now and then. Cowher is John Fox without the gum.

The Steelers have WON 2 of the last 5 Super Bowls. WTF are you talking about?

A 3rd winner the last 5 years? The New York Giants. If you think their defense, pass rush and running game didn't beat the Patriots you ain't paying attention. Yes, The Colts and the Saints also won a SB during this time. Trouble is, there just aren't that many Peyton Mannings or Drew Brees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were to give Fox a 6 year extension, and he were to win a Super Bowl, he would be on the same level as Cowher....so, we mind as well keep Fox.

WHAT? Seriously you should just stop now! IF Fox were to have a winning season and make the playoffs EVERY YEAR for the next six years he would still be behind Cowher, again cowher in a tougher conference, so please just stop with this.

Cowher my not be the next head coach but I agree with Jangler. Cowher will put arses in the seats...I will be there 3 or 4 homes games per year regarless of anything as I have been from the start but just think of the Steeler fans that would all the sudden become Steeler / Panther fans. It would be a very smart move on JR's behalf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • 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.
    • 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...