11/21/24
January 09, 2012
I'm not a Pats fan, but I love that, even with all that they've done the past decade, they're scrappy little fuckers who'll take whatever advantage they can possibly get and exploit it. It seems like they're never not trying to win in as absolute a fashion as they can.
posted by LionIndex at 12:38 PM on January 09, 2012
So the Broncos fire McDaniels, but he shouldn't be allowed to take a job a full season later when his knowledge of the team might affect them? This complaint is absurd.
Even if McDaniels didn't get the job this week, he could've been on the phone to Belicheck helping him stick it to the Broncos. Coaches talk to each other.
posted by rcade at 12:49 PM on January 09, 2012
Even as a Bronco fan I don't see a problem with this. He hasn't coached the Broncos in over a year.
posted by tron7 at 01:06 PM on January 09, 2012
So the Broncos fire McDaniels, but he shouldn't be allowed to take a job a full season later when his knowledge of the team might affect them?
Not so much that as should coaches be allowed to come on during the playoffs? The Pats couldn't sign a player who'd been cut by another team right now (can they?); should they be able to sign a coach?
posted by yerfatma at 01:21 PM on January 09, 2012
I think the strange part is that his contract with the Rams allowed this.
Gruden played in the Super Bowl against his former team one year after he left. The Bucs defense knew what they were going to do and demolished the Oakland offense. The Raiders should have changed their plays.
posted by bperk at 01:33 PM on January 09, 2012
Not so much that as should coaches be allowed to come on during the playoffs?
I can see the NFL imposing a rule to prevent it, but I think the impact is limited. The new hire has an extremely short time with players.
posted by rcade at 01:41 PM on January 09, 2012
but I think the impact is limited.
I would disagree. I think a former coach can bring alot from player tendencies, to calls at the line. A former coach knows a teams weaknesses and how to exploit them. I can think of a list of a dozen things without even trying that an old coach would know.
posted by Debo270 at 01:56 PM on January 09, 2012
I think the strange part is that his contract with the Rams allowed this.
That and the fact the Rams didn't ask for any compensation for a coach under their control.
EDIT: here's a possible explanation for letting him walk.
posted by yerfatma at 02:04 PM on January 09, 2012
EDIT: here's a possible explanation for letting him walk.
I don't know if I really buy that. What are the chances that the Rams would have had to pick up his salary next year? He would have found a job somewhere. He could still have joined the Patriots after the playoffs.
posted by bperk at 02:25 PM on January 09, 2012
If they canned him, they would have had to pay him, regardless of his employment status.
posted by yerfatma at 02:53 PM on January 09, 2012
I can think of a list of a dozen things without even trying that an old coach would know.
How many of them does he have to be on staff to share, though?
posted by rcade at 03:19 PM on January 09, 2012
If they canned him, they would have had to pay him, regardless of his employment status.
That's not what the link says. They would have had to pay him the difference between his contract and what the other team was paying him.
posted by bperk at 03:24 PM on January 09, 2012
How many of them does he have to be on staff to share, though?
All of them, if it's during the game.
posted by yerfatma at 03:45 PM on January 09, 2012
Even as a Pats fan I think this shouldn't be allowed, given McDaniels is all of a year removed from coaching in Denver and game-planned against multiple playoff teams this year as part of the Rams. Then again, as a Pats fan, I also love them taking advantage of the system as it is.