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!

     

The league's only black OC makes it to the Super Bowl....


King Taharqa

Recommended Posts

The Ravens' system of firing people who aren't pulling their weight works. Lee Evans drops the game winning pass last year in the AFCC? Gone. Billy Cundiff misses the game tying field goal at the same stage? Gone. Cam Cameron's offense sputtering? Gone.

It's a wonder they're now in the Superbowl just one year later. Gee golly how could promoting accountability possibly result in success?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but he wont be a head coach in 2013. LMAO. His 3 years in Indy they go to the Super Bowl his 1st year (14-2), wins the division and get bounced in the 1st round his 2nd (10-6). His QB is out the entire season in year 3, and his organization goes in full "tank" mode (2-14). Then he's fired before he's allowed to "inherit" the new franchise face the following year. Dude did not have a job until Cam Cameron was fired in December. Since then Flacco has been tearing it up, the Baltimore O line has played better, and their offense as a whole is making plays and putting up more yards and points per game. Yet most people will still tell you Jim Caldwell sucks and Peyton "choke artist" Manning carried him. The NFL has got to do better man. They are like 40 years behind the rest of the world.

That's mostly because nobody's going to wait over a month to fill in a head coaching position. What Jim Caldwell's contributed after taking a larger role as the OC and helping the offense score their way to at least a SB berth will put him on the radar for head coaching for at least the next few years.

What do you think about Colin K being in the superbowl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it always "color this color that"... Damnit people this is why there's still racism in the world because people can not see each other as equals instead we see each other as one color or the other... I'm so dam sick of this ish

No black brothers have coached against each other in the Super Bowl.

Only white brothers.

This is obviously racism.

Neither of you responded to KT's point that despite the fact that 80% of the league is black there are very few blacks in authority positions. @rscott94, you are advocating the "head in the sand" approach. Pretending that race and skin color doesn't matter is absurd. Race is still an issue because a lot of people are racist. And@ Kurb if you can't see that the NFL owners have a problem hiring qualified black men to positions of power then you are blind as fug. The only point that KT made I don't agree with is the point that the NFL is 40 years behind; they are not. Most of the world (with the exception of the US and Britain) is racist as poo. And the NFL is actually a pretty good mirror of American society as far as this issue is concerned.

Old white men who amassed the large sums of money required to buy/own a team will hire who they want and will not react well to being forced by the NFL to do anything. They are used to doing what they want. Their attitudes are the problem; why should they hire a qualified black man when they are not comfortable with that and (in their opinion) they can hire an equally competent white man to do that job? I'm not sure how the NFL can fix that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And @Kurb if you can't see that the NFL owners have a problem hiring qualified black men to positions of power then you are blind as fug. The only point that KT made I don't agree with is the point that the NFL is 40 years behind; they are not. Most of the world (with the exception of the US and Britain) is racist as poo. And the NFL is actually a pretty good mirror of American society as far as this issue is concerned.

Old white men who amassed the large sums of money required to buy/own a team will hire who they want and will not react well to being forced by the NFL to do anything. They are used to doing what they want. Their attitudes are the problem; why should they hire a qualified black man when they are not comfortable with that and (in their opinion) they can hire an equally competent white man to do that job? I'm not sure how the NFL can fix that.

Should a black man be hired to be a HC over a white man just because he is black? That is basically what KT has been advocating/insinuating on this board for years. Black people should get X because they are black and I disagree with that.

Caldwell was a poor HC in Indy (IMO), but it is worth mentioning that their GM created a poo team in the end. That said I doubt the rest of the NFL has forgotten that.

Bengals

Raiders

Bears

Panthers

Indy

Pittsburg

Have had minority coaches in recent years.

Hell most would say Tomlin was one of the top 5 coaches in the NFL.

2 of the best GM's in the NFL are black. Ravens/Giants.

I support diversity in all business, but not to a fault.

FWIW the NFL now has a owner that is a Minority (Khan in JVille)

KT has long self appointed himself some kind of pioneer of the Black man on these forums, a destroyer of racism. When in fact he promotes the success of one race over another for the sake of color. That in itself is wrong.

It does the world good to call out silly people from time to time.

and when everyone jumps on my back as a closet racist, I will stand behind my exceptionally diverse group of friends and associates and laugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither of you responded to KT's point that despite the fact that 80% of the league is black there are very few blacks in authority positions. @rscott94, you are advocating the "head in the sand" approach. Pretending that race and skin color doesn't matter is absurd. Race is still an issue because a lot of people are racist. And@ Kurb if you can't see that the NFL owners have a problem hiring qualified black men to positions of power then you are blind as fug. The only point that KT made I don't agree with is the point that the NFL is 40 years behind; they are not. Most of the world (with the exception of the US and Britain) is racist as poo. And the NFL is actually a pretty good mirror of American society as far as this issue is concerned.

Old white men who amassed the large sums of money required to buy/own a team will hire who they want and will not react well to being forced by the NFL to do anything. They are used to doing what they want. Their attitudes are the problem; why should they hire a qualified black man when they are not comfortable with that and (in their opinion) they can hire an equally competent white man to do that job? I'm not sure how the NFL can fix that.

Yes but isn't this thread racist itself? It sounds to me like he wants one superior race instead of equality... I agree there's still racism but it's not just on one side like most people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should a black man be hired to be a HC over a white man just because he is black? That is basically what KT has been advocating/insinuating on this board for years. Black people should get X because they are black and I disagree with that.

Caldwell was a poor HC in Indy (IMO), but it is worth mentioning that their GM created a poo team in the end. That said I doubt the rest of the NFL has forgotten that.

Bengals

Raiders

Bears

Panthers

Indy

Pittsburg

Have had minority coaches in recent years.

Hell most would say Tomlin was one of the top 5 coaches in the NFL.

2 of the best GM's in the NFL are black. Ravens/Giants.

I support diversity in all business, but not to a fault.

FWIW the NFL now has a owner that is a Minority (Khan in JVille)

KT has long self appointed himself some kind of pioneer of the Black man on these forums, a destroyer of racism. When in fact he promotes the success of one race over another for the sake of color. That in itself is wrong.

It does the world good to call out silly people from time to time.

and when everyone jumps on my back as a closet racist, I will stand behind my exceptionally diverse group of friends and associates and laugh.

Yeah Tomlin is definitely a top 5 head coach...

And everything else you said agreed sir..... agreed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's mostly because nobody's going to wait over a month to fill in a head coaching position. What Jim Caldwell's contributed after taking a larger role as the OC and helping the offense score their way to at least a SB berth will put him on the radar for head coaching for at least the next few years.

Thank you. Teams want to fill their HC positions now. They do not want to wait until after the SB.

Also, just because Caldwell took over a loaded Colts team and had a successful first season does not automatically make him a great coach. Hell, Larry Coker took over a loaded Miami-Fla team and came one play away from beginning his tenure with two consecutive perfect seasons/championships. If he was all that great it would not have taken him three years to get a job once he was fired and that job would be a lot more premiere than Texas-San Antonio.

Now a much better option for this argument would be Lovie Smith. His only really bad season was his first one. He then experienced a lot of success including four ten win seasons out of eight, took one team to the SB and another to the NFCCG and just this past season was 10-6. Plus, he was not still working the way Caldwell is so teams would not have to wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...