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!

     

If you were a prospective coach


FreeDrinkMafia

Recommended Posts

Thinkin' Mike Smith is feeling pretty good about taking over a complete mess in Atlanta 3 years ago. Same will happen here.
True, except lots of really important pieces are already in place. This is far from a complete mess. I'm sure coaches can recognize this. Sure we ain't big market, but the reality is we won't ever be. Big market isn't a meal ticket for success anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naive dumbass, that's why the French import it under that name. It's funny.

... lol.

anyway, nonsense aside, I think we'll be fine.

As strange as it sounds, I think this will be one of the better jobs out there in a lot of ways. I am also expecting Dallas and San Diego to remain closed now since both teams are picking up steam; I think if Garrett wins another 2 he's set in Dallas. Frazier has a good chance of sticking it out in Minny too. Means we're looking at Cincy, (possibly) Cleveland, San Francisco, and possibly Tennessee. maybe Jax too, but the way they've picked it up... and I know I'm forgetting someone but I'm tired.

I think out of those, San Fran is probably the biggest draw to a certain pac10 college coach, but I don't think we're far behind...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think that low media visibility at the start of new coach's tenure would be a good thing. No pressure because no one cares, and if you do well, you're a hero. In a market like Dallas or New York, if you don't produce your first year, you'll have the media speculating your job stability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think "media attention" is high on the list of criteria for a prospective coach, infact most coaches hate media attention. The fact that we're not under a red-hot spotlight means there's not as much national pressure or scrutiny.

We have a good core of young players to build on, tons of cap space and most likely the # 1 overall pick, so we are clay waiting to be molded by the next HC... sounds like a good situation to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every year there's a team that's the worst in the league, and as often as not that team is an attractive landing spot for a new guy ready to start his head coaching career or an old coach trying to get back in.

The Panthers situation is actually a pretty attractive one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...