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!

     

Picking a favorite coach


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

More than one guy has said that all the discussion related to future head coaches has their head swimming. And speaking as the guy researching and writing uot a lot of that info, can't say I blame them. I look down the list of possibles, think of the pros, the cons, the risks, the rewards, etc. There are soooooo many variables to it that it's pretty easy to just look at it all and go :willy_nilly:

Still, if you want to pick a favorite to stick with, here's a suggestion that may help give your thought process a little clarity.

Take a particular candidate, and imagine for a moment that he just got hired to coach a division rival.

Does the thought scare you? :eek:

How about if he's hired by a division rival and we hire one of the other potentials. Does the thought of that coaching matchup make you feel confident, or queasy?

The guy who scares you the most as a rival coach is likely going to be the guy you most want on your side.

Keep in mind that we're only going to be hiring one guy. The others may get head coaching jobs with other teams, which means those coaching matchups - while they may not be inside the division - will happen at some point.

So, who would you be the most concerned about us having to coach against?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some would probably throw out a name like Cowher or Gruden, but I don't think they're realistic candidates. That's why I'm not profiling any retreads in the head coaching thread.

(and anyway, it's not like we haven't successfully coached against Gruden before)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill Parcells

Highly unlikely to happen (plus we've faced him as a head coach before, and beaten him)

The guys who represent the most realistic possibilities right now are Leslie Frazier, Russ Grimm, Mike Zimmer, Jim Harbaugh, and maybe Sean McDermott.

Others that are possible - but less likely - would be Mike Heimerdinger, Ron Rivera, Winston Moss, Brian Schottenheimer, Jason Garrett and Perry Fewell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

arent you forgetting Cowher xD

No, I'm not. Cowher isn't happening.

He'd want more control than the organization would be comfortable with, he'd cost more than they want to pay, and Jerry Richardson isn't so high on retreads after his experience with George Seifert.

People can debate all they want about whether he ought to be a candidate, but it's a pretty safe bet that he won't be :nonod:

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...