(01-11-2021, 11:53 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I caught this in the article that was shared the other day, and I completely forgot to share it.  Check out the following exhange (Reader question is posted in bold, Hobson response follows.)

With Zac Taylor returning with only one year on his contract, how likely is it the Bengals will be able to recruit quality assistant coaches to work with a head coach whose contract may not be renewed unless significant improvement in wins? Doug Fecher, Hamilton, OH

DOUG: I'm not sure you've got the right contract parameters there, but there are examples past and present of coaches getting it going in the third year.

It sure seems to me that this assumption many of us have had (that Zac's deal was for 3 years) is wrong.

There's a lot of ways of Hobson could have answered this.  He could have all together avoided, or sidestepped the contract portion.  Or could have used something like "I don't know" or "It's not public how long..."  I don't think he replies this way unless he actually knows it's longer.

Remember, no details about this deal have ever been made.  It sure sounds like he may have been given a 4, or God forbid a 5 year deal.

I don't know that this changes that much, as I still think Taylor gets axed if he has another 5 win or less season.  But with the way this team has operated in the past it definitely makes things a little more cloudy.  I could see him getting another year going 7-10 (17 game season) if he is indeed signed for another year.

(01-11-2021, 12:15 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I really hope we set the bar high this season. We showed, when Burrow was QB, that our team is good enough to win games with him at QB.

(01-11-2021, 12:32 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: I’m sorry but I can’t get on board with this. Your record is who you are. If a team is good enough to win games they will win, not just come close.  There are many commentators who believe losing by one score or less means a team is getting close to being competitive but this is backwards.  Ask any respected coach and they’ll tell you losing lots of one score games is a bad sign — and it is.  It means a coach cannot prepare his team to dominate and it means a team cannot close the deal.

(01-11-2021, 11:58 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: any thing short of a playoff game should be grounds for dismissal at this point

(01-11-2021, 12:15 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I really hope we set the bar high this season. We showed, when Burrow was QB, that our team is good enough to win games with him at QB. If we lose/tie 6 games by a score or less for the third consecutive season (it was 8 in 2019, but you get the idea), I see no reason to keep ZT as our head coach. He can't close out a game to save his life.

(01-11-2021, 12:32 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: I’m sorry but I can’t get on board with this. Your record is who you are. If a team is good enough to win games they will win, not just come close.  There are many commentators who believe losing by one score or less means a team is getting close to being competitive but this is backwards.  Ask any respected coach and they’ll tell you losing lots of one score games is a bad sign — and it is.  It means a coach cannot prepare his team to dominate and it means a team cannot close the deal.

(01-11-2021, 12:15 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I really hope we set the bar high this season. We showed, when Burrow was QB, that our team is good enough to win games with him at QB. If we lose/tie 6 games by a score or less for the third consecutive season (it was 8 in 2019, but you get the idea), I see no reason to keep ZT as our head coach. He can't close out a game to save his life.

(01-11-2021, 02:09 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if it was a 5 year deal.

I would be surprised if it was a 5 year deal with no outs.

(01-11-2021, 02:06 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Not sure....

2019  2 wins
2020 with burrow   2 wins
2020 without burrow  2 wins

So im not sure Burrow is the magic answer for ZT

(01-11-2021, 02:09 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: I would be surprised if it was a 5 year deal with no outs.

(01-11-2021, 02:22 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: There are no "outs" with coaches.  Unlike players, their contracts are fully guaranteed.

If you sign a coach for X amount of years then you're on the hook for that total regardless of whether or not he stays for the contract's entirity. 

(01-11-2021, 02:22 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: There are no "outs" with coaches.  Unlike players, their contracts are fully guaranteed.

If you sign a coach for X amount of years then you're on the hook for that total regardless of whether or not he stays for the contract's entirity. 

(01-11-2021, 02:58 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: Whilst coaching contracts aren't the same as playing contracts when players can be cut there are a number of ways a smart lawyer could achieve a similar outcome.

Unlike player contracts which will have to comply with union requirements, NFL salary cap regulations and the like there would be a lot more scope for flexibility negotiating a HC's contract. This could be anything from key performance targets, break clauses, agreed damages, rolling contracts. We know the type of legal agreement Mike Brown negotiated with the County for the stadium which contains various outs and required the county to install holograms etc. Whilst obviously smaller, this is still a multi-million dollar deal and I'd expect Mike Brown to protect his own bottom line accordingly.

(01-11-2021, 04:15 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: I've always been under the impression that it's a 5 year deal from the get go. I don't remember where I read this,  but I'd be surprised if it was less than 5 years.

(01-11-2021, 05:14 PM)Sled21 Wrote: That was my thought as well, a 5 year contract, and my expectation has always been he would at least be given 3 to turn things around.