Posts
This is probably the least of the reasons why I believe Tom Coughlin will, and should, stay as the Giants' head coach. But it's a reason few have really pointed out, and it's worth mentioning.
There is a potential lockout coming in 2011.
In addition to the equity the 63-year-old Coughlin gained through winning a Super Bowl and then going 12-4 the following season, it would make little financial sense to bring in a new coach now. Coughlin still has two years remaining on his contract. The new guy would probably get a four-year deal, which would mean starting over in 2010 with a new system and new philosophy, only to be interrupted for a year -- perhaps more -- in the event of a lockout. Remember, you'd still have to pay that coach, and it would probably cost the team more than the $5.2 million it would have to pay Coughlin in the idle season to bring in a name coach.
Quite simply, it's more economical to allow Coughlin to work in 2010, pay him in 2011, and then send the then-65-year-old coach into retirement. Of course, a return to winning and the playoffs could give the Giants many more options than that.
As I said, the economics are the least of the reasons. But they do exist as legitimate ones, and the Giants are cost-conscious. Unlike that owner in Washington, who undoubtedly will spend money wildly this offseason to little avail, even if he does get Mike Shanahan to pilot his ship.
EP
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ernie - You do realize that is chump change compared to what the Giants are bringing in don't you? A couple of rows worth of PSLs cover that salary. We won't even discuss the TV contract money. If that's their rationale, it's a bad one. This isn't Jacksonville where the team is hanging by a financial thread. You don't have to be Dan Synder, but it helps if you have some common sense. Not making the playoffs costs the Giants far more in revenues than the coach's salary. Again, I question whether or not COughlin has lost the players. If he has, he has to go - no matter the cost or timing. If he has not lost the players (and there's no evidence on the field that the players support him), then you can rationally discuss bringing him back. I understand that, sadly, the newspaper industry, the world you know, has been horribly damaged and may not survive. But the vast majority of NFL teams are making boatloads of cash.
ReplyDeleteI think Coughlin has earned the benefit of the doubt here. Everyone, he is a super bowl winning coach! TC brought our team to 5 straight playoff appearances and one of the most exciting super bowl victories ever! I am not sold on the guys quitting on him. I did not once see anyone on the sidelines getting into shouting matches with him. In my opinion, Sheridan and Gilbride did not adequately prepare this team with their gameplan; furthermore, the defensive gameplan was a joke. The players need to step up. The only two players I saw on the sidelines trying to lead were Eli and Pierce. Unfortunately, I think Pierce is gone as a player and screaming at players does not seem to be part of Eli's personality. So, who then is going to be the leader? To fire these guys up and provide them with guidance when the chips are down? Maybe Osi should spend less time arguing with his DC and complaining about a contract and more time figuring out how to be a better all around football player. Tuck has clout on the team, why doesn't he start leading? These are questions I had since the Denver game.
ReplyDeleteThe way to fix this team, in my opinion, is two new coordinators, some player leadership, and Reese to put together a great draft with one or two key FAs.
No way he should lose his job. He has not had a losing record the last five years, gotten them to the playoffs in 4 of 5 years and won a Super Bowl. The last two games were big big letdowns ... as were some others this year.
ReplyDeleteWhat amazes me is how you guys are ignoring the impact of the PSLs. The Giants made a HUGE money grab and there is always fallout when any business does that. How do you tell the guy that shelled out $40,000 for the RIGHT to BUY two tickets, that 8-8 is okay because "Coughlin won a Super Bowl"? Think of it this way. You love to go out to eat at Restaurant Mara. Been going there for years. Sometimes the food is great, sometimes it's not. But you keep going because you're a fan of the place and you know the owner will always TRY to give you a good meal. Now, all of a sudden, you have to pay to get INTO Restaurant Mara and THEN you still have to pay for your meal. Are you going to be so forgiving when the chef botches your meal? Hell no! The Giants raised the bar by charging for PSLs. It's their right to make all the money they can. The flipside of that is that expectations and demands will be greater because the demands on the customer are greater. You can't charge PSLs and preach patience. Doesn't work. Giants Stadium was fine, they just wanted a new stadium to bring in still more revenues. Again, that's their right. However, when you put additional demands on your customers, you can bet your last dollar they will put additional demands on you. If the Maras think Giants fans will tolerate another lost decade like the 70s, they are sorely mistaken. They changed the relationship between the team and the fans. Now, they have to live with the consequences, both good and bad.
ReplyDelete