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 are 15 winning head coaches with jobs in this league (tenured)

frash.exe

By frash.exe,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
Posted

"tenured" meaning I'm excluding Bruce Arians because he hasn't accumulated an entire season's worth of experience as a HC.

Only two of those guys took longer than two years to deliver a winning season or playoff berth to a franchise. Gary Kubiak and Jeff Fisher during his run with Tennessee in the 90s. As far as the other 13 are concerned, regardless of what they inherited or what talent they had to work with to start off they've found immediate success with the team they've been coaching, and by immediate I mean within the first two years.

Two years are a reliable measure for seeing if a Head Coach is worth his salt. I'm not saying Ron isn't a good head coach, but Ron is probably not a good head coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

wow Tom Landry

you going to go back 50 years for your 4th example?

Just picked some of the most successful coaches who all went to the playoffs in their first stint by year 4 and whose owner was paid off by not jumping ship too soon. Even Belicheck took Cleveland to the playoffs in year 4 for one of that franchises very rare playoff appearances. If they didn't bail on him maybe they would have gotten Brady instead of New England. Vermeil in St Louis for example were awful the first 2 years and then in year 3 win the super bowl. Same with Johnson except it was year 4 and 5 and he won 2 superbowls back to back.

I could have picked more recent guys but for some of you with limited knowledge of the history of the league, you would have little idea who I was talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Mike Shanahan went 7-9 his first year for the Raiders and was fired after starting 1-3 in year 2. Good thing for Denver. Although in his first year he went

By the way, Shanahan went 6-10 and 5-11 his first 2 years in Washington. If they make the playoffs this year I guess it was good thing they didn't bail on him too soon. Of course 2 years tell it all, right??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Tom Cat

Guest Tom Cat

Posted
Posted

Not to mention Mike Shanahan sucks

The redskins mortgaged their future for years to come on rg3 and what they thought might be immediate success- if he gets hurt or doesnt pan out shannahan will look like the fool he is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      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.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      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...