Jump to content
EaglesPeteC

TCMD Discussion!!

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, squire12 said:

How do you reconcile the desire of multiple teams wanting to hire the same coach for a position?

Is it FCFS?  Is it best pitch?  Is it based on waiver claim priority?   Does signing a new HC or OC/DC to a contract deduct the amount you have in salary cap for the rest of the MOCK?    I get that NFL coaches do not count against the salary cap, but there needs to be some mechanism in place to allow for a process to play out.

First come first serve. It is by far the least problematic way to do it when the concept itself is not built into the framework of the mock. As I said earlier, the way it is right now, it has to be done for the satisfaction of the GMs alone & doesn't need to be factored into anything aside from each individual GM's plans. A minute part of the mock overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PurpleMugen said:

First come first serve. It is by far the least problematic way to do it when the concept itself is not built into the framework of the mock. As I said earlier, the way it is right now, it has to be done for the satisfaction of the GMs alone & doesn't need to be factored into anything aside from each individual GM's plans. A minute part of the mock overall.

For this run, I would just like to see what you Gm's would bring in to coach, I wouldn't be concerned with having to look to see if someone already claimed them or not.  Consider the coaches names mentioned as interviews rather than hires.  Where a coach can have multiple interviews.  

In the future mocks, we've used made up salary but it didn't really work out because teams that were happy with say their head coach, but not with their coordinators had more money to toss at it as did someone looking to change out their HC.

I think we can find a system that would work, it's just one of those things that hasn't really ever gotten much attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ny92jefferis said:

We've tried in the past and it just gets crazy as the majority of top college coaches pour into the nfl, which zaps the realism right out of it.  I'm open to discussing a solution for a coaching event next year, so if you've got ideas send them to me.

Do I not get Grimm/Mularkey/Horton coaching staff? Grimm is the Titans OL coach and a holdover from Mularkey's staff. Mularkey resigned and is unemployed (obviously worked with Grimm last year), and Horton has been out of a job last year. I think it's a realistic staff, but if I can't do this staff I'm changing my offseason plans significantly as Horton hire is my attempt to try and convert to 3-4 D, and obviously Mike Smith is a 4-3 type guy. Grimm is also critical to my view for an offensive line overhaul and Mularkey for OJ Howard's development. I don't think anyone else is competing for the same staff (if they are, oops?) and it brings an element to the mock I think. I doubt many teams need staffing changes overall and it probably isn't a major issue. Could have a veto system where if someone has an issue they can nix an interview, hire or whatever. Like team XYZ hires Nick Saban,  we obviously don't need to approve. Guys like Grimm have been involved in HC interviews for years though without landing a top job and are realistic imo -- there are a number of NFL types without jobs (ie. Horton/Mularkey || and if approved Mike Smith and Dierk Koetter).

Edited by Trojan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Trojan said:

Do I not get Grimm/Mularkey/Horton coaching staff? Grimm is the Titans OL coach and a holdover from Mularkey's staff. Mularkey resigned and is unemployed (obviously worked with Grimm last year), and Horton has been out of a job last year. I think it's a realistic staff, but if I can't do this staff I'm changing my offseason plans significantly as Horton hire is my attempt to try and convert to 3-4 D, and obviously Mike Smith is a 4-3 type guy.

You guys are taking this coaching staff stuff too seriously.  This mock draft doesn't even house an event for hiring a coaching staff.  I'm fine with you guys naming who you'd think would be the best fit for your team and I'm sure Pete would consider your options during the award process but even right now the awards for this mock don't house a scale to judge you on your coaching staff.  

All I'd like to see is what coaches that you would bring in for interviews.  Just thinking it would be a nice read to see what you all thought and perhaps draw some discussion from it.  If you want to list those coaches you named above as your staff, I'm fine with that, but know that other teams can list them as well. 

 

edit:  You mentioned you wanted a 34 D if you had said coach.  That's awesome info to know, but as far as I'm concerned I'm not judging you on your coaching staff, but if a new coach affects your game plan, tell us about it.  This is great discussion information. 

Edited by ny92jefferis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that coaching hires would work, there are too many intangibles and options to determine where each coach would chose to go. 

Personally I wouldn't change a thing with the Rams coaching staff this year. But if you asked last year I would have a bunch of opinions. 

 

I guess the only way I see this working would be if we created a pool of coaches and their preferences and let the GMs pick and squabble from said list. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IT would be cool if you could set up a thing where you put how you value certain things in a coach and put that in on the coach you want and have him or her, somehow computer generated accept the best one or refuse all and stay in the booth lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Previously in the workbook there was a place (I think on the depth chart doc) that had a list of the coaching staff. I know the hiring process isn't a part though, but with minimal teams interested on any given year I think a basic naming to complement an offseason makes sense. Doesn't need to be included in awards or evaluation or whatever. Just if I'm making significant changes I think having a coaching staff that represents those changes makes more sense for me. Like having a more run based OL/TE strength offense and a 3-4 defense doesn't really fit the struggling interior OL, bad run game offense from last year and the 3-4 doesn't make sense with Mike Smith. Not a huge deal though more for emphasis on what my offseason focus is and keeping it consistent (Horton 3-4 over Smith 4-3//Grimm/Mularkey exotic run game to reduce stress on Winston to try for constant superman and improve blocking).
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Trojan said:

Previously in the workbook there was a place (I think on the depth chart doc) that had a list of the coaching staff. I know the hiring process isn't a part though, but with minimal teams interested on any given year I think a basic naming to complement an offseason makes sense. Doesn't need to be included in awards or evaluation or whatever. Just if I'm making significant changes I think having a coaching staff that represents those changes makes more sense for me. Like having a more run based OL/TE strength offense and a 3-4 defense doesn't really fit the struggling interior OL, bad run game offense from last year and the 3-4 doesn't make sense with Mike Smith. Not a huge deal though more for emphasis on what my offseason focus is and keeping it consistent (Horton 3-4 over Smith 4-3//Grimm/Mularkey exotic run game to reduce stress on Winston to try for constant superman and improve blocking).
 

I agree, I mean if the Giants were changing their defense from a 43 to 34 I wouldn't want Spags coaching it.  Or if McAdon't was still our HC I'd fire him immediately, so I get it.  

If one or all of you guys want to get a plan together for discussing "potential" coaching hires in the form of interviews, please run with it, if you need help with docs or the likes I can help out closer to the first of the month.  Plate is full at the moment though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question on the CBA (I like it) is last year when I had the Raiders I cut Janikowski later in the FA period as well as Aldon Smith. Then once they were in the FA pool I offered them vet minimum 1 year deals and was awarded them, and some complained that it could be "gaming the system". The Raiders didn't need the cap room and it was more a symbolic "these guys don't deserve that high of a salary", but I wanted to know if that was in fact considered ultimately "gaming the system" because my intent is 100% not to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IrishHooligan00 said:

CBA looking good man

Thanks for looking it over, I know it was a read.  The plan is to create a walk-through and / or no more than a 3 pager explaining the process of this mock.  Most of our new members come in with the idea that it's going to be set up like ffmd w/ a resigning period, talent agency and shark tank and when we kick off they are completely lost and freaked out at the idea of having to read in depth guidelines I was forced to prescribe anxiety medication....haha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Trojan said:

One question on the CBA (I like it) is last year when I had the Raiders I cut Janikowski later in the FA period as well as Aldon Smith. Then once they were in the FA pool I offered them vet minimum 1 year deals and was awarded them, and some complained that it could be "gaming the system". The Raiders didn't need the cap room and it was more a symbolic "these guys don't deserve that high of a salary", but I wanted to know if that was in fact considered ultimately "gaming the system" because my intent is 100% not to do that.

Yes so this year, which I guess I need to state that somewhere, is that if a team releases a player, said player will not show up in their available list of free agents either resign or UFA for 3 bidding rounds.  If they are released with 3 or less rounds remaining they won't show up at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said:

Yes so this year, which I guess I need to state that somewhere, is that if a team releases a player, said player will not show up in their available list of free agents either resign or UFA for 3 bidding rounds.  If they are released with 3 or less rounds remaining they won't show up at all.  

This rule has been included in the guidelines.  Good eye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×