NFL to review McDaniels situation in off season

[shmessy]

Well, well, well...

I get skewered on the other thread when I made the "irrational" argument that something smelled funny, but now I seem to be vindicated by the NFL front office.

I guarantee you that the NFL will clarify things by forbidding teams from hiring Offensive or Defensive Coordinators after either the trading deadline or the end of the season.

Whether or not there were any shenanigans involved in the hiring of McDaniels is irrelevant. It smells fishy, so now the NFL powers will have to weigh in.

There is nothing fishy - - there is no rule against it.

I happen to believe there should be a rule against it, and the NFL will probably do so after the season.

The Patriots did absolutely nothing wrong there.


Keep looking for the conspiracy angle though, it's the modus operandi of the loser.

 

[Armchair Bronco]

It doesn't smell fishy at all. Even those writers who've complained about it have admitted that.

Look, in all seriousness, there's a lot less here than meets the eye.

However, just as politicians *claim* to take steps to avoid even the *appearance* of impropriety, the NFL needs to do the same thing with respect to the midseason or end-of-season hiring of coaches. Especially if that guy used to be the Head Coach of a team you're actually playing in the playoffs...or likely to play.

Who cares what the writers say? By all accounts, these guys are little more than clowns. In fact, I doubt many of them could compete heads up with Blinky the Clown so they became sports writers instead.

It's the appearance of impropriety that counts, not any real infraction. That's just the way it is.

 

[PatsSox363804]

If this were another team no one would care. It's simple, our offensive coordinator took another job and we had an opportunity to bring in a former guy who knows the system so we could make a smooth transition and not have a distracted offense during the playoffs. We would have been stupid not to do this, but because it's the Patriots it must have been fishy and we need more rules.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Schefter just reported that the league is also going to look into the whole Jesus/Tebow/Bronco situation because other teams have complained that having ************ helping Saint Timmy gives the Bronco's an unfair advantage. Look for a rule change to address this in the offseason.

 

[Deus Irae]

Look, in all seriousness, there's a lot less here than meets the eye.

However, just as politicians *claim* to take steps to avoid even the *appearance* of impropriety, the NFL needs to do the same thing with respect to the midseason or end-of-season hiring of coaches. Especially if that guy used to be the Head Coach of a team you're actually playing in the playoffs...or likely to play.

Who cares what the writers say? By all accounts, these guys are little more than clowns. In fact, I doubt many of them could compete heads up with Blinky the Clown so they became sports writers instead.

It's the appearance of impropriety that counts, not any real infraction. That's just the way it is.

There's only an "appearance" if you're looking for one. Players not under contract can be picked up by teams in the playoffs. Coaches not under contract can be picked up by teams in the playoffs. In this case, it was a coach not under contract. Had McDaniels been fired right away, along with the rest of the Rams' staff, this would never have been any kind of issue at all, particularly since the same thing's happened before in recent years. Preventing the Patriots from looking at McDaniels would have put the Patriots at a complete disadvantage, as the Chiefs could have 'stolen' him away without the Patriots even having an opportunity to prevent that.

This is just a typical case of a bunch of Nancys getting their panties in a twist over nothing.

 

[NEP4Life]

Schefter just reported that the league is also going to look into the whole Jesus/Tebow/Bronco situation because other teams have complained that having ************ helping Saint Timmy gives the Bronco's an unfair advantage. Look for a rule change to address this in the offseason.

Expect Jesus to be fined and the Broncos to lose a first round pick.

 

[SVN]

Well, well, well...

I get skewered on the other thread when I made the "irrational" argument that something smelled funny, but now I seem to be vindicated by the NFL front office.

I guarantee you that the NFL will clarify things by forbidding teams from hiring Offensive or Defensive Coordinators after either the trading deadline or the end of the season.

Whether or not there were any shenanigans involved in the hiring of McDaniels is irrelevant. It smells fishy, so now the NFL powers will have to weigh in.

It smells fishy for people who want to make a big deal out of. JMcD was interviewed before the broncos game. No one made a noise then. The media controls to show the people what is fishy and waht is not. If consistently ask coaches and players "What do you think, does it give and advantage?" -someone is going to bite. When its the pats , the media does exactly that.

 

[Nikolai]

Methinks maybe Armchair Bronco believes everything he reads on the internet? As long as it reinforces preconceived notions of conspiracies swirling around everywhere?

The media is playing such people like a banjo.

 

[patchick]

The NFL SHOULD review the lack of a rule and SHOULD put in a rule against it.

Really? A rule against what, exactly?

Am I the only one who just totally doesn't understand what all of the fuss is about? The Patriots aren't bringing in a coaching mercenary to tap some triple-secret inside info on a specific opponent. They're just replacing their outgoing OC for next year with the obvious candidate.

The new guy is idle, so bringing him in now is the natural move to let him get to know the player personnel heading into draft, FA and planning season. And once he's on payroll, they'll assign him tasks just like any other staff member.

What exactly should they have done differently? Not reached the playoffs? Made the Steelers win so they couldn't face any other team their new asst. coach has worked for? Keep him in an underground bunker in an undisclosed location until the playoffs are over?

I truly don't get it. What's the big deal?

 

[Armchair Bronco]

You guys think the rest of the league is paranoid & delusional.

We think some New England fans may have a persecution complex.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

You guys think the rest of the league is paranoid & delusional.

We think some New England fans may have a persecution complex.

Well ESPN is in Bristol, CT

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I don't see the problem. No one's suggesting that the Pats broke any rules and since the CW was that the Pats would be playing the Steelers today instead of the Broncos, only haters are suggesting that there was anything particularly nefarious about what the Pats did. Plus, Broncos' fans, management and mediots can't squawk too much since they called Josh every name under the book when he was booted out of Denver.

I think there should be a rule against hiring a coach away from another team until you have played out your season, even if, as in this case, the other team is happy to get rid of his contract.

There's a big difference between the league closing a loophole that a team used to its advantage and the league suggesting that a team did something wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

You guys think the rest of the league is paranoid & delusional.

We think some New England fans may have a persecution complex.

The writers for the Denver papers have said it's a non-issue even as they've cried about it. Former coaches have said it's a non-issue. Other teams have done the same thing in recent years.

It's a non-issue.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't see the problem. No one's suggesting that the Pats broke any rules and since the CW was that the Pats would be playing the Steelers today instead of the Broncos, only haters are suggesting that there was anything particularly nefarious about what the Pats did. Plus, Broncos' fans, management and mediots can't squawk too much since they called Josh every name under the book when he was booted out of Denver.

I think there should be a rule against hiring a coach away from another team until you have played out your season, even if, as in this case, the other team is happy to get rid of his contract.

There's a big difference between the league closing a loophole that a team used to its advantage and the league suggesting that a team did something wrong.

There was/is no loophole.

 

[MassPats38]

Really? A rule against what, exactly?

Am I the only one who just totally doesn't understand what all of the fuss is about? The Patriots aren't bringing in a coaching mercenary to tap some triple-secret inside info on a specific opponent. They're just replacing their outgoing OC for next year with the obvious candidate.

The new guy is idle, so bringing him in now is the natural move to let him get to know the player personnel heading into draft, FA and planning season. And once he's on payroll, they'll assign him tasks just like any other staff member.

What exactly should they have done differently? Not reached the playoffs? Made the Steelers win so they couldn't face any other team their new asst. coach has worked for? Keep him in an underground bunker in an undisclosed location until the playoffs are over?

I truly don't get it. What's the big deal?

I agree. McDaniels was run out of Denver on a rail in December 2010, and was replaced by a coach who radically changed the offense. He coached in the NFC all season. His career, with the exception of 3 seasons, is the Pats. Few would view him as a success outside of his career in New England. The Rams benefited from letting him go given his bleak prospects with a new head coach and current financial obligations to McDaniels.

If McDaniels coached the Broncos this season, then I would agree that it might raise flags. If Fox used the same playbook or the same QB (e.g., Orton), then that might make some difference. The Broncos are simply a different team. It also ignores the fact that game preparation is so in depth in this day and age that Belichick is almost certainly better versed on the Broncos than McDaniels might be from past affiliation having played them this season. McDaniels is not some spy who might be able to point out critical flaws the Broncos might have successfully concealed throughout an entire season. The team is 9-8, so we can just assume there are plenty of flaws apparent to even the casual observer.

This squawking over this issue just gives fans of other teams some other reason to call the Patriots the Cheatriots. There was no rule broken, but why bother with that trivial detail. In the end, who cares. Most of their teams are watching the playoffs instead of participating, so cry away.

 

[PlainOldEd]

Great. Now there'll automatically be yet another asterisk next to whatever post-season success the Pats enjoy.

According to the haters there is always an asterisk, but it is usually imagined.

 

[rjw]

Shouldn't be anything to review. The OC is leaving, needed a new one, went to a familiar face.

 

[Urgent]

I'm guessing there will be no rule.

The life of an assistant coach is rough and constrained.
They work ungodly hours, making a tenth what their players make while putting in double the time.
When their boss is fired, as the boss tends to be every four years, they normally get fired as well - but with far less control on the outcome.
They are barred from forming a union.

Second, the situation that creates an opportunity for a coach like this is relatively rare. There has to be a long-term opportunity, or else the coach is leaving to be a lame duck. Which, in effect, means there has to be a sudden opening. If it's in-season, either the coach has been fired, is available on the street, or is given permission to move. There will not be a situation where one play-off team will give a sitting coach the permission to move to another play-off team.

If players are released, they are free to go to a competitive team. We see it all the time. Patriots pick up a back-up safety from the Jets; Jets pick up a fourth-string QB. Absolutely nothing wrong with it. If you choose to release the player, the player is free to sign either based on his athletic ability or his knowledge of a particular system. In this case, if the Bronco's thought Josh Daniels was truly valuable, they would not have fired him. If the Rams thought so, he would not have been released.

Finally, Polian is no longer on the competition committee. That makes it harder to push through a vindictive rule.

If a rule is made, I think it's an overreaction and a mistake.

 

[shmessy]

Really? A rule against what, exactly?

Am I the only one who just totally doesn't understand what all of the fuss is about? The Patriots aren't bringing in a coaching mercenary to tap some triple-secret inside info on a specific opponent. They're just replacing their outgoing OC for next year with the obvious candidate.

The new guy is idle, so bringing him in now is the natural move to let him get to know the player personnel heading into draft, FA and planning season. And once he's on payroll, they'll assign him tasks just like any other staff member.

What exactly should they have done differently? Not reached the playoffs? Made the Steelers win so they couldn't face any other team their new asst. coach has worked for? Keep him in an underground bunker in an undisclosed location until the playoffs are over?

I truly don't get it. What's the big deal?

1) Against teams paying/compensating other teams who are out of the playoffs for their coaches who are still under contract.

2) We can't "acquire" Steven Jackson or Darelle Revis either. They weren't cut/fired and their seasons have run their natural courses. If you don't make the playoffs, your season is over.

3) Despite you writing "They're just replacing their outgoing OC for next year with the obvious candidate." - - that's not the whole story, isn't it? McDaniels is working right now.

Once again, the Patriots did nothing wrong at all. If I'm the NFL, however, I want to close this loophole in the future to prevent a Polian or someone of that ilk to send his entire coaching staff (for compensation) over to another team to help beat an adversary and then wink-wink "hire" them back.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Well, well, well...

I get skewered on the other thread when I made the "irrational" argument that something smelled funny, but now I seem to be vindicated by the NFL front office.

I guarantee you that the NFL will clarify things by forbidding teams from hiring Offensive or Defensive Coordinators after either the trading deadline or the end of the season.

Whether or not there were any shenanigans involved in the hiring of McDaniels is irrelevant. It smells fishy, so now the NFL powers will have to weigh in.

You are aware that the Broncos hired Mike Shanahan in season in 1989 after he was fired as head coach by the Raiders. Did things smell fishy then. Was it improper then? Or just now, when the Patriots do it?