Report - Irsay and Front Office at Odds Over HC

[N4L]

1 hour ago, Blackstar12 said:

Anybody but Saturday at this point.

Rams losing a good DC but gaining two third round picks 

[Forge]

2 minutes ago, N4L said:

Rams losing a good DC but gaining two third round picks 

Are you sure he's a good DC?

[Nabbs4u]

2 hours ago, N4L said:

Rams losing a good DC but gaining two third round picks 

This is the part I don't understand? You want diversity, want to promote the hiring of minority coaches throughout the NFL?

Give the 3rd rd picks to the Organzations willing to "Hire" said minority employee, not the team who loses them.

Still don't understand that reasoning / *** backwards concept.

[AZ_Eaglesfan]

3 hours ago, Forge said:

Are you sure he's a good DC?

He stinks imo. Charmin soft defense.

[ET80]

11 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

This is the part I don't understand? You want diversity, want to promote the hiring of minority coaches throughout the NFL?

Give the 3rd rd picks to the Organzations willing to "Hire" said minority employee, not the team who loses them.

Still don't understand that reasoning / *** backwards concept.

The flaw in this is you’ll have a bunch of teams gaming the system for the picks during a rebuild and these “one and done” guys would be much more frequent.

If this model you’re suggesting was in play - the Texans would have two extra picks for David Culley and Lovie Smith, despite everyone sort of understanding those hires were placeholders at best. The backlash the Texans are getting for firing two POCs in such fashion is pretty loud, despite those two losing their locker rooms and winning a combined seven games in two years - all the reasons to fire a HC were there for everyone to see, but it’s still painting the Texans as tone deaf.

If there were picks involved, how much louder would that backlash be?

[Xenos]

32 minutes ago, ET80 said:

The flaw in this is you’ll have a bunch of teams gaming the system for the picks during a rebuild and these “one and done” guys would be much more frequent.

If this model you’re suggesting was in play - the Texans would have two extra picks for David Culley and Lovie Smith, despite everyone sort of understanding those hires were placeholders at best. The backlash the Texans are getting for firing two POCs in such fashion is pretty loud, despite those two losing their locker rooms and winning a combined seven games in two years - all the reasons to fire a HC were there for everyone to see, but it’s still painting the Texans as tone deaf.

If there were picks involved, how much louder would that backlash be?

Yeah the current system is flawed but still better than the alternative. You’re awarding a team for spending two years to develop a minority coach at least.

[NVRamsFan]

15 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

This is the part I don't understand? You want diversity, want to promote the hiring of minority coaches throughout the NFL?

Give the 3rd rd picks to the Organzations willing to "Hire" said minority employee, not the team who loses them.

Still don't understand that reasoning / *** backwards concept.

First step IMO is getting candidates in position to be promoted. The system is flawed for sure and not sure how to fix it but we are seeing more good candidates.

[dll2000]

When Luck abruptly retired didn't Irsay pay him more than he owed him under contract?

...

Yes, according to multiple sources Irsay could have taken back 24.8 million from Luck and didn't.   That is a lot of money.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/andrew-luck-colts-reach-settlement-after-shocking-retirement-might-have-lost-out-on-500-million/

According to same article Lions made Calvin Johnson pay his back.

I'm not a fan of Irsay for other reasons, but it seems he is being bashed on this thread a bit over Luck and this needs be pointed out.

 

[Xmad]

2 hours ago, dll2000 said:

When Luck abruptly retired didn't Irsay pay him more than he owed him under contract?

...

Yes, according to multiple sources Irsay could have taken back 24.8 million from Luck and didn't.   That is a lot of money.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/andrew-luck-colts-reach-settlement-after-shocking-retirement-might-have-lost-out-on-500-million/

According to same article Lions made Calvin Johnson pay his back.

I'm not a fan of Irsay for other reasons, but it seems he is being bashed on this thread a bit over Luck and this needs be pointed out.

 

Irsay isn't a perfect human being and that being pointed out isn't a bad thing, retired players are entitled to THEIR money especially if it's guaranteed money. Doing the right thing vs. the lions being petty with an all time great to their franchise because Lions gonna Lion and continue to ****ing suck isn't worthy of praise IMO.

Luck's retirement leaking was unfortunate and it probably was the front office somewhere, as for who no one knows, doubt it was one of the players considering they all know better than anyone the struggles of dealing with injuries and the toll it takes.

[dll2000]

1 minute ago, Xmad said:

Irsay isn't a perfect human being and that being pointed out isn't a bad thing, retired players are entitled to THEIR money especially if it's guaranteed money. Doing the right thing vs. the lions being petty with an all time great to their franchise because Lions gonna Lion and continue to ****ing suck isn't worthy of praise IMO.

Luck's retirement leaking was unfortunate and it probably was the front office somewhere, as for who no one knows, doubt it was one of the players considering they all know better than anyone the struggles of dealing with injuries and the toll it takes.

If he is contractually entitled to a refund then it isn't guaranteed money.

Irsay is far from perfect.  I am not a fan of his.  I am just saying he gave Luck 24.8 million dollars he wasn't obligated to give him.   

If I am Luck I am pretty happy about that.   To insinuate Irsay screwed Luck at every turn is incorrect in light of that fact.  

[Xmad]

31 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

If he is contractually entitled to a refund then it isn't guaranteed money.

Irsay is far from perfect.  I am not a fan of his.  I am just saying he gave Luck 24.8 million dollars he wasn't obligated to give him.   

If I am Luck I am pretty happy about that.   To insinuate Irsay screwed Luck at every turn is incorrect in light of that fact.  

He didn't screw luck at every turn, but giving him money he was entitled to as an NFL player is just *the* thing to do if you maybe want your franchise QB to come back in a year or two maybe after he's recovered mentally and his head is back onto football. It wasn't just a good will gesture Irsay wanted his franchise QB back and giving him that money was just the easiest way to not piss him off.

Calvin Johnson had long since retired and the Lions came after it purely because he ****ing retired and chose his health over football. https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2021/9/15/22675896/calvin-johnsons-beef-lions-1-6m-payment-nfl that money never mattered to the lions it was purely to punish Johnson.

Andrew Luck? If you want him to come back in a year, two, three etc. You don't go after him, you don't piss off the fanbase, you don't go after that money. You support your QB and close all the door on rumors until he wants to come back. If he doesn't oh well but you kept that door open just in case. 

It was never about Luck retiring it was to keep the door open so he could play again if he wanted to.

[Wyld Stallyns]

1 hour ago, Xmad said:

 

Luck's retirement leaking was unfortunate and it probably was the front office somewhere, as for who no one knows, doubt it was one of the players considering they all know better than anyone the struggles of dealing with injuries and the toll it takes.

It definitely wasn’t a player. To my knowledge, the only players who even had a clue about the retirement were Brissett, who Luck told the day before, and Castonzo who was Luck’s best friend on the team. 

[dll2000]

1 hour ago, Xmad said:

He didn't screw luck at every turn, but giving him money he was entitled to as an NFL player is just *the* thing to do if you maybe want your franchise QB to come back in a year or two maybe after he's recovered mentally and his head is back onto football. It wasn't just a good will gesture Irsay wanted his franchise QB back and giving him that money was just the easiest way to not piss him off.

Calvin Johnson had long since retired and the Lions came after it purely because he ****ing retired and chose his health over football. https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2021/9/15/22675896/calvin-johnsons-beef-lions-1-6m-payment-nfl that money never mattered to the lions it was purely to punish Johnson.

Andrew Luck? If you want him to come back in a year, two, three etc. You don't go after him, you don't piss off the fanbase, you don't go after that money. You support your QB and close all the door on rumors until he wants to come back. If he doesn't oh well but you kept that door open just in case. 

It was never about Luck retiring it was to keep the door open so he could play again if he wanted to.

I think Luck made it clear he wasn't coming back.   But maybe.  Luck wouldn't be first person to change his mind and come back.  Especially if pain went away.  

That is pretty cynical view of Irsay though.  Maybe he gave him 25 million because he appreciated what he did and sacrifices he made.

Gun to my head he probably gave him the 25 million for public relations and to keep door open rather than being nice.  I am fairly cynical myself.  

Either way it was good for Luck.

 

[Soko]

4 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

I think Luck made it clear he wasn't coming back.   But maybe.  Luck wouldn't be first person to change his mind and come back.  Especially if pain went away.  

That is pretty cynical view of Irsay though.  Maybe he gave him 25 million because he appreciated what he did and sacrifices he made.

Gun to my head he probably gave him the 25 million for public relations and to keep door open rather than being nice.  I am fairly cynical myself.  

Either way it was good for Luck.

 

Worth noting that the money wasn’t given after the fact, it was already Luck’s. Luck would have to give it back. A distinction without a difference, perhaps, but I think it’s significant in this case.

[dll2000]

4 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Worth noting that the money wasn’t given after the fact, it was already Luck’s. Luck would have to give it back. A distinction without a difference, perhaps, but I think it’s significant in this case.

Collection is awkward.

Probably have to liquid some things, maybe take some early withdrawal penalties.  

Rich people (smart rich people) don't just leave that kind of money in checking and savings accounts.