Raiders may take a Bengal scout...that could leave them with only 5 scouts or so....

Hmmmhttps://t.co/RcWI9Lz2gD

— All Bengals (@AllBengals) January 18, 2022

Not sure how integral he is in our operation, but he is African American so he’d net us multiple 3rds if they did hire him.

(01-18-2022, 08:11 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not sure how integral he is in our operation, but he is African American so he’d net us multiple 3rds if they did hire him.

https://www.bengals.com/news/trey-brown-brings-a-football-life-to-bengals-player-personnel

(01-18-2022, 08:06 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: Raiders may take a Bengal scout...that could leave them with only 5 scouts or so....

Hmmmhttps://t.co/RcWI9Lz2gD

— All Bengals (@AllBengals) January 18, 2022

Bengals if you are listening, I'll gladly be hired on as a scout! 

(01-18-2022, 08:11 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not sure how integral he is in our operation, but he is African American so he’d net us multiple 3rds if they did hire him.

He already interviewed with them before they hired Mayock so I’d say there’s a decent chance. Would the comp picks start in this draft so or 2023?

Man if we got 2 4ths for losing players and a 3rd this year for losing him that’d really open up the draft for us. Plus $70+ mil in FA if we cut Waynes….big time offseason coming after we win the SB

He sounds like a good scout, but the Bengals need to expand the entire office anyways

(01-18-2022, 08:06 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: Raiders may take a Bengal scout...that could leave them with only 5 scouts or so....

Hmmmhttps://t.co/RcWI9Lz2gD

— All Bengals (@AllBengals) January 18, 2022

Wait….what? This is a real rule? 1. I didn’t know losing scouts or coaches nets draft picks. 2. Because of his skin color it nets more? That’s crazy.

Jesus we have like three guys and someone wants to poach one? Dallas probably has like 50. Get one of theirs.

(01-18-2022, 09:11 PM)Ell Prez Wrote: Wait….what? This is a real rule? 1. I didn’t know losing scouts or coaches nets draft picks. 2. Because of his skin color it nets more? That’s crazy.

It was an update to the Rooney rule to encourage teams to hire and develop minority candidates. If you have a guy for 2+ years and then they get hired as a HC/GM for another team you get 2 3rd rounders for developing him.

(01-18-2022, 09:21 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: It was an update to the Rooney rule to encourage teams to hire and develop minority candidates. If you have a guy for 2+ years and then they get hired as a HC/GM for another team you get 2 3rd rounders for developing him.

While good in principle I can see this having the opposite affect. Say we're interested in a Raven's staff member of color and he and a white guy from the NFC are rated  pretty much equally in our evaluation. Which one are we taking? 

(01-18-2022, 09:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: While good in principle I can see this having the opposite affect. Say we're interested in a Raven's staff member of color and he and a white guy from the NFC are rated  pretty much equally in our evaluation. Which one are we taking? 

Whichever one accepts our offer.

(01-18-2022, 09:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: While good in principle I can see this having the opposite affect. Say we're interested in a Raven's staff member of color and he and a white guy from the NFC are rated  pretty much equally in our evaluation. Which one are we taking? 

There are around 8 HC opportunities right? If all hire minorities then that is 16 extra 3rd round picks. Then are you going to fill your OC/DC a White Guy or a Minority to have a chance at those 2 extra 3rd round picks?

I get they are trying to get more Minorities in front of the Camera but this screws deserving candidates out of jobs and can mess up the draft.

(01-18-2022, 09:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: While good in principle I can see this having the opposite affect. Say we're interested in a Raven's staff member of color and he and a white guy from the NFC are rated  pretty much equally in our evaluation. Which one are we taking? 

But are the draft picks taken from the team hiring the coach or are they added on like compensation picks to the end of the round?

While teams might still might not want to strengthen another team, it does make a big difference than if the hiring team is losing the picks.

Hope this isn't the scout that noticed Ja'Marr Chase and Joe Burrow are good.

(01-18-2022, 10:07 PM)jason Wrote: Hope this isn't the scout that noticed Ja'Marr Chase and Joe Burrow are good.

(01-18-2022, 10:01 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: But are the draft picks taken from the team hiring the coach or are they added on like compensation picks to the end of the round?

While teams might still might not want to strengthen another team, it does make a big difference than if the hiring team is losing the picks.

They are like compensatory picks.

(01-18-2022, 09:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: While good in principle I can see this having the opposite affect. Say we're interested in a Raven's staff member of color and he and a white guy from the NFC are rated  pretty much equally in our evaluation. Which one are we taking? 

The team making the hire does not lose picks, you get that, right?  

I think having the best GM/HC possible might be more important than if you pick #110th or #112th in round 4.  

If someone else hires him, you'd lose out on your candidate AND still pick later. 

(01-18-2022, 10:07 PM)jason Wrote: Hope this isn't the scout that noticed Ja'Marr Chase and Joe Burrow are good.

I hope it isn't the scout that noticed Ossai, Logan Wilson, and Chris Evans were good. 

(01-18-2022, 10:01 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: But are the draft picks taken from the team hiring the coach or are they added on like compensation picks to the end of the round?

While teams might still might not want to strengthen another team, it does make a big difference than if the hiring team is losing the picks.

They are comp picks. Teams hiring don’t lose picks as that would discourage them from hiring minority candidates. This is just to encourage teams to give minority coaches lower roles to help develop more quality candidates for HC/GM jobs when they become available.

Overall I don’t see many teams passing up on stealing a quality coach/FO exec because a rival will get a couple of late 3rd round picks. In bfine’s scenario we’d be hurting them by taking a talent from their organization but giving they get a couple of comp picks to make up for it. Seems like a push at best. When you look at the success rates of 3rd round comp picks it would probably still work out in the hiring teams favor to steal a known commodity from their franchise.

(01-18-2022, 10:26 PM)leonardfan40 Wrote: They are comp picks. Teams hiring don’t lose picks as that would discourage them from hiring minority candidates. This is just to encourage teams to give minority coaches lower roles to help develop more quality candidates for HC/GM jobs when they become available.

Overall I don’t see many teams passing up on stealing a quality coach/FO exec because a rival will get a couple of late 3rd round picks. In bfine’s scenario we’d be hurting them by taking a talent from their organization but giving they get a couple of comp picks to make up for it. Seems like a push at best. When you look at the success rates of 3rd round comp picks it would probably still work out in the hiring teams favor to steal a known commodity from their franchise.

There are a limited number of Comp picks and draft picks all together. Other teams will lose opportunities for comp picks and others will get theirs pushed down.