For those that want the staff back, does Shanahan need an extension?

[tshile]

I'm sure the second part of that topic made some people's heads heads explode

For those that think Shanahan and company should be back for their 5th and final year, do you think it's important they get a contract extension in the offseason to avoid the 'lame duck' year?

Arguments on the radio for it were that attracting free agents is harder when they don't know who will coach the following year and that players become empowered over the coach when they believe that coach will have no say in their evaluation for the following year.

Is the lame duck coach really an issue? Does giving a 1 year contract extension really solve that issue, isn't it a pretty transparent process?

 

[Henry]

My main concern is if you fire the coach who are you going to bring in? We'll have the same problem we've been having for the past 15 years. Snyder will roll over any new face he brings in and re-treads ... well, they only get you so far. Anyone got any bright ideas?

Don't see the solution here, so I'm gonna let the season play out and see if we win seven straight or something.

 

[tshile]

Ok, but let's just pretend for a second that Mike and staff are going to be here next year. Maybe the contract is too heavily loaded, maybe Snyder promised him 5 years and is being good on his word, maybe the Front Office really thinks the offseason issues since Mike got here have put him in an unfair position (restricted free agency during uncapped year, lock out, cap penalties, griffin's injury).

Let's say for a second everyone's giving Mike, and staff, year 5 to prove things are headed in the right direction.

Does he need an extension? If he doesn't get one are the results hampered by being a lame duck? Can you not possibly invest any more money (a contract extension) into the situation without seeing how year 5 ends?

 

[Primus Porcus]

I think this staff has earned a shot at running this team with a full cap, full offseason, and a QB going through a whole camp/preseason. Does that mean give him an extension? I guess. We all know that contracts don't mean squat anymore.. if things look the same way this year next November, maybe you start exploring the next option at head coach. As weird as it may sound, that might include making Kyle the head coach, and brining in a new OC to be play caller. Kyle puts together the offense, obviously the offense can be successful, but a new OC as the actual signal caller.

 

[tshile]

The reason I ask is because the consensus of talking heads is that you can't let Mike and staff go into year #5 as 'lame ducks.' Meaning the only options are to fire the staff or give them one more year with an extension (so an implied 2 years). It seems most people have written off the idea of just rolling through year 5 and seeing what happens. I'm just curious what BGO people think.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I'm with Henry...keeping Mike around seems to be the only viable solution because the alternatives are just not promising. There is a modicum of consistency right now and I think our best bet, for better or for worse, is to stick with it. If I were in charge, I'd extend Mike for 2 years, which should be plenty of time to enact his "vision," if its ever going to be enacted.

I just don't know if I can take another overhaul.

 

[Chris]

I wish that every member of the organization could be placed into a one year perform or else situation.

But I'm a dreamer.

 

[tshile]

Also - maybe November is the wrong time to have this conversation.... I guess for arguments sake lets assume we continue the way we started. So we finish in the 6-8 win category.

 

[McD5]

I believe the extension deadline is tomorrow, tshile.

If that is true, and he doesn't get an extension in the next 24 hours, then that will say a lot.

 

[tshile]

We all know that contracts don't mean squat anymore..

That's kind of where I am with it... but I'm not sure. I don't know how giving him a 1 year extension fixes the 'lame duck' problem. If he got a 2+year extension I could see it, but 1 year seems like Snyder just throwing money away.

I would be interested in how free agents would look at the situation.

 

[tshile]

I believe the extension deadline is tomorrow, tshile.

If that is true, and he doesn't get an extension in the next 24 hours, then that will say a lot.

So you're in the boat that an extension would be important? (whether you like the idea of keeping him or not)

I didn't realize there was a deadline on extending coaches.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I believe the extension deadline is tomorrow, tshile.

If that is true, and he doesn't get an extension in the next 24 hours, then that will say a lot.

I didn't even realize that there was an extension deadline...interesting.

 

[Primus Porcus]

That's kind of where I am with it... but I'm not sure. I don't know how giving him a 1 year extension fixes the 'lame duck' problem. If he got a 2+year extension I could see it, but 1 year seems like Snyder just throwing money away.

I would be interested in how free agents would look at the situation.

yeah it's a tough one. No real way to know how far the ripple goes. I know if I was a free agent, I wouldn't want to sign on with a guy, knowing that they're going to show him the door before I can even get his system down, plus not knowing who is coming in behind him, and what scheme they are going to run.

 

[McD5]

I didn't even realize that there was an extension deadline...interesting.

I'm not positive of that, but I have definitely read it recently. It was either a beat reporter, or one of the "insiders" who made the comment. I'll do some research to see if I can verify it.

 

[Primus Porcus]

I'm not positive of that, but I have definitely read it recently. It was either a beat reporter, or one of the "insiders" who made the comment. I'll do some research to see if I can verify it.

I cant find anything saying there's a deadline to extend coaches... maybe I'm missing it, I dunno.

 

[McD5]

I cant find anything saying there's a deadline to extend coaches... maybe I'm missing it, I dunno.

I had never heard of it before either. That's why it stood out to me.

I suppose it could be contract-specific to Shanny.

 

[Goaldeje]

Im definitely NOT for wiping the slate clean and starting all over, but he has to be willing to make changes. Look, Kyle thinks he is smarter than everyone in the league and he gets "cute" too much. He needs to check that **** or move on. Haz has proven he cant do it..even when weve gotten our players BACK from injury we just cant do it with the 3-4.

He has to start taking more control and making these hard decisions or else he will have to find himself another job as well.

I mostly agree, the only caveat in what you say is how much input does Shanny have on the base D we run? It may have been his call to go 3-4 all the way, and out of Haz's hands completely.

Having said all that, unless there is a dramatic turnaround, ala last year, I think some of the coaching staff needs to be replaced. I think forcing Mike to bring in some new positional coaches couldn't be anything but good, just to shake some **** up. Let's start with promoting Fletcher over Slowik, for instance.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I mostly agree, the only caveat in what you say is how much input does Shanny have on the base D we run? It may have been his call to go 3-4 all the way, and out of Haz's hands completely.

Having said all that, unless there is a dramatic turnaround, ala last year, I think some of the coaching staff needs to be replaced. I think forcing Mike to bring in some new positional coaches couldn't be anything but good, just to shake some **** up. Let's start with promoting Fletcher over Slowik, for instance.

Yeah, you have to wonder if Mike would be okay with this though. Wasn't one of the conditions of him coming here that he had total control, even over who ran the D and what kind of D it was? I believe that's specifically why he brought in Haz...because he would run a 3-4. I could be misremembering though.

Also, firing Kyle is another no-go, seeing as how its his son...I can't see that going over well.

 

[Primus Porcus]

I had never heard of it before either. That's why it stood out to me.

I suppose it could be contract-specific to Shanny.

I wonder if it's a deadline to pick up a team option. I believe I've heard of them putting those deadlines in place, to eliminate a team from letting a coach/player shop around, then pullin the rug out from under them and extending the team option.

 

[tshile]

Also, firing Kyle is another no-go, seeing as how its his son...I can't see that going over well.

Which is the problem with nepotism.