Make coaches fulfill their whole contracts.

[Bearly]

The only way this would make sense is if you also forced teams to honor the same contract, taking away their ability to fire coaches.

Seems like a solution in search of a problem.

They honor the monetary portion outside of a new hire offset. Keeping him on staff isn't part of the agreement. All the ins and outs are in said contract and honored by both sides.

Teams already have greater control on hires and movement that any other business in the western world but hey, freedom only counts when it suits a bias.

 

[NCChiFan]

How is it fair to teams that invest in that coaches system with players and scheme. Millions spent and draft capital used, then the coach leaves unexpected. Is that fair?

It happens everyday in the business world. Everyday. Last business I was in, we hired an outside agency to put a manager in our food department, we liked him so much, we hired him out from under the outside food service agency as they didn't ask for a non compete clause. >shrugs< Last book keeper I hired, I did so out from a temp agency, whom again, had no non compete clause.

Yea, pretty much fair in a free society with no restrictions placed ahead of time. So, no coach would be hired ever, if he is told he can't improve himself if an offer comes along that would pay him more money. Zero. Your team would go coach less.

Edit: And worse, in an NFL system that had the appearance of holding black coaches back and implemented steps to change this by requiring owners to interview minority coaches in their hiring practice (Rooney rule), exactly how would that happen if coaches were held to contracts without an ability to move ahead?

Edit #2: Or you would have nothing but OC and DC and other minor coaches only signing 1 year contracts. Take your pick.

 

[Noonthirtyjoe]

It happens everyday in the business world. Everyday. Last business I was in, we hired an outside agency to put a manager in our food department, we liked him so much, we hired him out from under the outside food service agency as they didn't ask for a non compete clause. >shrugs< Last book keeper I hired, I did so out from a temp agency, whom again, had no non compete clause.

Yea, pretty much fair in a free society with no restrictions placed ahead of time. So, no coach would be hired ever, if he is told he can't improve himself if an offer comes along that would pay him more money. Zero. Your team would go coach less.

Edit: And worse, in an NFL system that had the appearance of holding black coaches back and implemented steps to change this by requiring owners to interview minority coaches in their hiring practice (Rooney rule), exactly how would that happen if coaches were held to contracts without an ability to move ahead?

Edit #2: Or you would have nothing but OC and DC and other minor coaches only signing 1 year contracts. Take your pick.

It happens every day in the business world??? No in fact it does not. If you sign a contract you are expected to fulfill it with major penalty's if you don't. If you sign a contract with the army you are there that amount of time. Players sign contracts can they leave for better pay next year? The guy you hired that left was not under a contract was he? I know of no business ever outside coaching that you can void a contract because something better came along. If you do please list it.

 

[Bearly]

It happens everyday in the business world. Everyday. Last business I was in, we hired an outside agency to put a manager in our food department, we liked him so much, we hired him out from under the outside food service agency as they didn't ask for a non compete clause. >shrugs< Last book keeper I hired, I did so out from a temp agency, whom again, had no non compete clause.

Yea, pretty much fair in a free society with no restrictions placed ahead of time. So, no coach would be hired ever, if he is told he can't improve himself if an offer comes along that would pay him more money. Zero. Your team would go coach less.

Edit: And worse, in an NFL system that had the appearance of holding black coaches back and implemented steps to change this by requiring owners to interview minority coaches in their hiring practice (Rooney rule), exactly how would that happen if coaches were held to contracts without an ability to move ahead?

Edit #2: Or you would have nothing but OC and DC and other minor coaches only signing 1 year contracts. Take your pick.

They actually can't do what happened to that guy. NFL coaches can't leave without a position advancement. They can't even discuss it. More restrictive than the real world and we have a thread about it, with the freedom fighters thinking coaches have too much freedom.

These coaches can't take the same jobs elsewhere and guys that sign non compete contracts in the real world can't either if that's in the stipulations. Worst case in the real world is the former employer can recoup costs of finding a replacement and/or sue for emotional distress if the other party simply leaves without cause. In an NFL case, promotion availability is in the contract as an acceptable stipulation, allowing them to leave.

 

[gallagher]

There are not that many new HCs in a given year. And, let's recall, some of these guys are not "HC" material.

I think that while it hurts your team to have a coach hired away, that is why you have succession planning. You gotta be happy for your guy that he earned a big promotion, and move on.

What is BS is that coaching interviews happen before the Superbowl

 

[JoJoBoxer]

It happens every day in the business world??? No in fact it does not. If you sign a contract you are expected to fulfill it with major penalty's if you don't. If you sign a contract with the army you are there that amount of time. Players sign contracts can they leave for better pay next year? The guy you hired that left was not under a contract was he? I know of no business ever outside coaching that you can void a contract because something better came along. If you do please list it.

So your one example of the business world is the army?

Chuckle


As for honoring a contract, a person who lucks into a job is willing to accept most conditions while a top of his sector type of person will demand certain conditions or the business can go pound sand. Lower level hires are not that important to a business thus the business does not try to keep them in a stranglehold, allowing for a good worker to become more valuable and find a better position elsewhere.

When a new head coach is hired by a team, he has a Wishlist of coordinators whom he wants. Because of this dynamic, a team is willing to accept a coordinator to move to another team if he can get a better position just to get him in the door. That is part of the contract, thus, the coach is allowed to move on.

If business people were not allowed to find better positions, there would not exist the term headhunter.

 

[bamainatlanta]

Did someone really post this?

 

[Discus fish salesman]

Did someone really post this?

Yeah, Lenny is currently smothering a bunny while trying to comprehend why its a ridiculous notion to refuse to allow coaches to leave for advancement like most other industries allow as well

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

The other issue here is that a team wanting one of your coordinators is typically a sign that you're doing something right.

 

[bamainatlanta]

The other issue here is that a team wanting one of your coordinators is typically a sign that you're doing something right.

Bears fans aren’t used to that.

 

[Bearly]

Bears fans aren’t used to that.

Fangio

 

[bamainatlanta]

Fangio

Exception proves the rule.

 

[Noonthirtyjoe]

So your one example of the business world is the army?

Chuckle


As for honoring a contract, a person who lucks into a job is willing to accept most conditions while a top of his sector type of person will demand certain conditions or the business can go pound sand. Lower level hires are not that important to a business thus the business does not try to keep them in a stranglehold, allowing for a good worker to become more valuable and find a better position elsewhere.

When a new head coach is hired by a team, he has a Wishlist of coordinators whom he wants. Because of this dynamic, a team is willing to accept a coordinator to move to another team if he can get a better position just to get him in the door. That is part of the contract, thus, the coach is allowed to move on.

If business people were not allowed to find better positions, there would not exist the term headhunter.

One example? Reread. You know there was more then one. Headhunters don't even talk to those under a contract. Simple question and of coarse you gave no answer. Name a contract you can break because something better came along? Only coaching, I know of no other. Do you?

 

[JoJoBoxer]

One example? Reread. You know there was more then one. Headhunters don't even talk to those under a contract. Simple question and of coarse you gave no answer. Name a contract you can break because something better came along? Only coaching, I know of no other. Do you?

It happens every day in the business world??? No in fact it does not. If you sign a contract you are expected to fulfill it with major penalty's if you don't.

No example given yet.

If you sign a contract with the army you are there that amount of time.

The first example.

Players sign contracts can they leave for better pay next year? The guy you hired that left was not under a contract was he? I know of no business ever outside coaching that you can void a contract because something better came along. If you do please list it.

No additional examples.

Ok, time for you to give me some bullshit reply.

 

[Nelly]

Let's say you're offered a job at a different company that is higher up the ladder and pays double, triple or 10 x as much as you're getting now. You'd be bailing on your current job the next day, no matter how important you are to your organization or how much love you've professed about your current company. This is the way of the world.

I think what he's saying though is that the coordinator signed a contract to be the coordinator. So, if Waldron signed a 3 year deal and gets offered a head coaching job after 2, he's still un contract here. Meaning, the Bears would let him out of the deal so he can go take the HC position, and is asking why teams are obligated to do that, maybe? I could be wrong about how it all works but that's my understanding anyway.

...and my answer would be that no team wants to appear like they're standing in someone's way of moving up in the world.

 

[Penny Traitor]

Name a contract you can break because something better came along?

Literally all of them.

Sure there may be some sort of penalty or that particular business may want nothing to do with you afterwards, but there is no such thing as contract you cannot break.

 

[Bearly]

Literally all of them.

Sure there may be some sort of penalty or that particular business may want nothing to do with you afterwards, but there is no such thing as contract you cannot break.

FTC Noncompete Ban Looms Over Sports Execs, Coaches, NIL

The Federal Trade Commission issued a final rule that will ban noncompetes. It will has major implications for sports and could face legal challenges.

www.sportico.com

This could get interesting. I suspect Congress will give a waiver for sports as usual. Looks like it will be more restrictive than the real world... as usual. This dude is complaining about movement withing a monopoly, LOL.

 

[hyatt151]

I think teams need to start holding coaches to their contracts. I don't think it's fair to bring in players a coach asks for and then said coach gets stolen away. You teach your guys a system and then leave for a better job leaving your old team screwed and changing systems again. If we sigh a OC to a 3 year contract and invest picks and money into getting him his guys then he needs to honer the contract he signed. He can get his promotion when his contract is done. This drives me crazy. Am I the only who feels this way?

wah wah wah welcome to the NFL

 

[Noonthirtyjoe]

Literally all of them.

Sure there may be some sort of penalty or that particular business may want nothing to do with you afterwards, but there is no such thing as contract you cannot break.

The courts are full of cases of broken contracts. The legal contract holders win almost 100% of the time. If you sign your name you are held responsible. ( Literally none of them ) LMFAO

 

[Noonthirtyjoe]

wah wah wah welcome to the NFL

Thanks it's nice to be here.