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!

     

Fire Fox, Promote The Black Coach.... Ron Meeks


beastson

Recommended Posts

I mean why not? There is nothing wrong with giving Meeks a chance. Better than giving Davidson one. I hear apologies and how Jerry wants to bring a trophy here but he still hasn't done jack poo in this terrible season.... I mean do SOMETHING atleast. I think he full of it

I started looking around the league and it just brought me back to African American coaches. Raheeem got the Bucs of all teams sitting nice, Steelers once again doing their thing, Vikings just won today fresh off their firing. Promote Meeks.... I mean lets think about this and be honest all b.s aside. Having a African American at the helm whether its HC, QB or even GM... is that really a problem in Jerry eyes. And when I mean at helm, I mean fully in charge and putting trust into

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Fox is fired I'd certainly rather see Meeks as interim coach than Davidson, but not because Meeks is black, what difference does that make? The season is lost now... so unless you know you're going to promote an assistant to head coach next year and you want to get him some experience what's the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it but only temporarily, (I would never want Meeks as a head coach) which means it would be done to send a message (losing isn't ok), and JR does not do things like 'send messages'. JR is perfectly comfortable losing this year, people need to start realizing that. Fox will stay to the end.

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...