Josh Mcdaniels Rule

[MarquisJ]

https://t.co/DTmhD8KQQP

NFL considers “Josh McDaniels rule” so coaches can take new jobs during playoffs 

[DonnieDarko1023]

Not a fan of the rule......Colts would have been stuck with McDaniels 

[John Waylon]

2018: where we have to have rules to make people stuck to their word. 

[will426]

8 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

2018: where we have to have rules to make people stuck to their word. 

It’s actualt a great idea lol don’t accept an offer if you don’t want it in the first place

[John Waylon]

1 minute ago, will426 said:

It’s actualt a great idea lol don’t accept an offer if you don’t want it in the first place

 

It’s not that he didn’t accept something he didn’t want. That’s not how accepting something works. He changed his mind. 

 

We shouldn’t need rules to encourage us to keep our word. 

[DaveA1102]

16 minutes ago, MarquisJ said:

https://t.co/DTmhD8KQQP

NFL considers “Josh McDaniels rule” so coaches can take new jobs during playoffs 

 

Seems unnecessary to me.  Last year, everyone knew Shanahan was going to be the 49ers HC after the Superbowl, it didn't really need to be announced or confirmed.  Same this year with Patricia.

 

I think the backlash that McDaniels' decision has seen across the league will be as big a deterrent than an actual rule change.

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

I'm for it as long as in the league by-laws it is listed as the "Josh McDaniels Rule". 

[Buck Showalter]

Moved to NFL General section, as I think we all can agree that the Colts & fans want as little to do with McD as possible!

 

But as far as an actual rule being put in place for this type of thing???

I guess my question would be, is it really necessary? Are there really that many people of questionable character that would pull a stunt like this?

 

 

 

[John Waylon]

10 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

I guess my question would be, is it really necessary? Are there really that many people of questionable character that would pull a stunt like this?

 

 

 

 

Also 2018: when anything bad happens to anyone anywhere we have to make rules to try and make sure it never happens again. 

[PeterBowman]

hey look another rule change or enforcement due to something New England or someone associated with New England did.

[TdungyW/12]

30 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

I'm for it as long as in the league by-laws it is listed as the "Josh McDaniels Rule". 

Or change it to “snake change mind rule”

 

im glad he switched we are better off!

[ReMeDy]

1 hour ago, John Waylon said:

 

It’s not that he didn’t accept something he didn’t want. That’s not how accepting something works. He changed his mind. 

 

We shouldn’t need rules to encourage us to keep our word. 

 

The worst part from what I read is Josh McDaniels was the one who was seeking out a head coaching position in the first place! The Colts did not reach out to him to BECOME a head coach; they reached out to him because he put the request in himself!

 

And, of course, Josh did not one, but TWO sitdown interviews that by all indications suggested he was on-board with the Colts.

 

Ironically, he settled for being an OC, so basically he just wasted everyone's time and used the Colts as leverage to increase his position with NE.

[OffensivelyPC]

I think this will result in more teams declining to let teams interview their coaching staff - or at least that may end up being an unintended consequence.  Maybe I'm wrong. I mean teams can already decline interviews as it is, so I guess it may not have that big of an effect.  Had this rule been in place for the 2017 season, Josh could have signed early on in the playoffs and perhaps Bill would have declined the interview because he didn't want McDaniels' partiality compromised.  The result is what we would've had to wait until they lost anyway.  We would still have had the same result anyway because Ballard announced it before it was on paper.  I dunno, I just am not sure that the rule is necessary in the first place.

[Colts_Fan12]

Now give us the Pats 1st pick lol

[OffensivelyPC]

1 hour ago, John Waylon said:

 

It’s not that he didn’t accept something he didn’t want. That’s not how accepting something works. He changed his mind. 

 

We shouldn’t need rules to encourage us to keep our word. 

In a perfect world, yes.  As far as we know, he had every intent on signing until he was coaxed out of it by Belichick and Kraft.  So I mean it's not exactly like it was the most fraudulent change of mind.  Still, I don't really disagree with you at all.  If you're on the fence or acknowledge that you still have to talk to your employer(s), that should be made known so other teams know that when they start hiring other coaches.  At the end of the day, if he let the Colts know he wasn't 100% sure and if we hadn't announced it prior to the contract being signed, we avoid a lot of this.  Trust, but verify, you know?

[rockywoj]

As Pat Kirwin on Sirius XM NFL Radio has said many times, the rule preventing a prospective coach was stupid, that it put teams in a lurch and hurt coach prospects that were on teams making deep runs (because a lot of owners / GMs often said they can’t wa around for a guy).  To me, it’s a no brainer to allow prospective coaches to sign on and that it’s hogwash that allowing them to do so will cause them to not do a good job with their current teams until done.

 

i support the rule change, but am glad, retrospectively, that McDaniels showed who and what he is. Whew, close one there.

[csmopar]

2 hours ago, Buck Showalter said:

Moved to NFL General section, as I think we all can agree that the Colts & fans want as little to do with McD as possible!

 

But as far as an actual rule being put in place for this type of thing???

I guess my question would be, is it really necessary? Are there really that many people of questionable character that would pull a stunt like this?

 

 

 

Honestly no but I'm all for it if they name it the McDaniels rule... that way the stigma sticks with him forever. 

[csmopar]

49 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Now give us the Pats 1st pick lol

Or all of them for the next 3 years.... 

[Colts_Fan12]

Just now, csmopar said:

Or all of them for the next 3 years.... 

Even better!

[WoolMagnet]

57 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Honestly no but I'm all for it if they name it the McDaniels rule... that way the stigma sticks with him forever. 

It will stick regardless.

much like spygate, deflategate, and Roe vs Wade.

[crazycolt1]

I am not a fan of this rule at all.

If there is a rule that needs to be made is no team can contact any coaches or coordinators till after the super bowl. That would put an end to all the distractions that's faced while the season is still going.

 

[Farns01]

I can get behind making everybody wait.  Permit the interviews but stop all hiring until after the Super Bowl.  I don’t see this fixing the biggest issue.  I’m glad Mcdumb@$$ is gone but he screwed over a bunch of assistants thinking they were gettting hired by the Colts and probably turned down other opportunities.

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 3/23/2018 at 12:37 PM, John Waylon said:

 

Also 2018: when anything bad happens to anyone anywhere we have to make rules to try and make sure it never happens again. 

 

On 3/23/2018 at 6:17 PM, crazycolt1 said:

I am not a fan of this rule at all.

If there is a rule that needs to be made is no team can contact any coaches or coordinators till after the super bowl. That would put an end to all the distractions that's faced while the season is still going.

 

 

I like the reasoning from all the input in this thread.  One thing I have not seen mentioned, the impact McDaniels had on assistant coaches involved.  Yes, the few we signed are staying.  But how many other coaches did JMcD talk into leaving their position so they could be brought on board by him once hired, and now do not, and /or cannot find another NFL job?

 

Bad teams want to get a new coach on board as soon as their season is over, such that coach can begin the works of putting his plan together and in action right away. I get that. Playoff teams do not want their assistants distracted by constant barrage of potential moves attention. I get that too.  But like the catch rule, the current version needs to be tweaked in some way to improve it, even if only by a little bit.

[Valpo2004]

On 3/23/2018 at 12:25 PM, Buck Showalter said:

Moved to NFL General section, as I think we all can agree that the Colts & fans want as little to do with McD as possible!

 

But as far as an actual rule being put in place for this type of thing???

I guess my question would be, is it really necessary? Are there really that many people of questionable character that would pull a stunt like this?

 

 

 

 

Bill Belichick, although he quit after he signed the contract so the Jets got compensation for that.

 

I think it's a good rule.  Otherwise what this incident will have taught the league is that nothing matters until a contract is signed.  So what will happen is even if a coach committed to one team and that team shut down it's HC search, another team might suddenly drop in and offer that HC more money or something.

 

I think it's a good rule because unless you constrain the teams they will all fall to the lowest common denominator.  And that being Bill Belichick and Josh McDaniels.  

[Valpo2004]

On 3/25/2018 at 6:10 AM, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

I like the reasoning from all the input in this thread.  One thing I have not seen mentioned, the impact McDaniels had on assistant coaches involved.  Yes, the few we signed are staying.  But how many other coaches did JMcD talk into leaving their position so they could be brought on board by him once hired, and now do not, and /or cannot find another NFL job?

 

Bad teams want to get a new coach on board as soon as their season is over, such that coach can begin the works of putting his plan together and in action right away. I get that. Playoff teams do not want their assistants distracted by constant barrage of potential moves attention. I get that too.  But like the catch rule, the current version needs to be tweaked in some way to improve it, even if only by a little bit.

 

I don't think signing a contract that says you are coming here next year adds at all to the distraction.  They already do interviews and make verbal commitments.  And when those commitments are made the media picks up on them right away, so it's never any secret that you took a job elsewhere.  Signing on the dotted line just to set it in stone doesn't add to the distraction.  

[Valpo2004]

On 3/23/2018 at 6:17 PM, crazycolt1 said:

I am not a fan of this rule at all.

If there is a rule that needs to be made is no team can contact any coaches or coordinators till after the super bowl. That would put an end to all the distractions that's faced while the season is still going.

 

 

That would be ok except that the whole off season thing gets going pretty quickly after the SB.  Remember McDaniels screwed us right after the SB and we brought in Reich like 4 days later.  And when we brought him in he only had a few weeks before the combine.  

 

If they wanted to do that they would need to delay everything in the offseason.  Combine, convince colleges to delay their pro-days, draft.  It would be a big freaking mess.  On top of that it would probably also mean delaying OTA's.

 

A document that sets in stone that you are coming here after your season is up makes the most sense to me.  

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

That would be ok except that the whole off season thing gets going pretty quickly after the SB.  Remember McDaniels screwed us right after the SB and we brought in Reich like 4 days later.  And when we brought him in he only had a few weeks before the combine.  

 

If they wanted to do that they would need to delay everything in the offseason.  Combine, convince colleges to delay their pro-days, draft.  It would be a big freaking mess.  On top of that it would probably also mean delaying OTA's.

 

A document that sets in stone that you are coming here after your season is up makes the most sense to me.  

Personally I don't think it would have quite the effect you list.

It's already a mess the way the rules are set up now.

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

3 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I don't think signing a contract that says you are coming here next year adds at all to the distraction.  They already do interviews and make verbal commitments.  And when those commitments are made the media picks up on them right away, so it's never any secret that you took a job elsewhere.  Signing on the dotted line just to set it in stone doesn't add to the distraction.  

 

Possibly not, but I wouldn't mind seeing that there are stipulations in the signed contract that the new head coach signs that he cannot contact the club concerning personnel decisions, nor vice versa, until his team is eliminated from playoff contention. Also that the coach cannot address in detail any media questions regarding his (soon to be) new club until eliminated as well, and this is memorandum distributed to the media each year.

 

Of course he probably will contact potential assistants, but I feel he cannot instruct the club to sign them, for if they do, that invites the media to inquire about them, yes? (distractions?)