BigBuff423 Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 I've given it some time before I posted such a topic, and while I have no real issue with Mike Shanahan not becoming the next Bills coach, I just thought some positive regard should be given to the man despite him not being in Buffalo. If the reports were true, and I don't think we really know for sure, that Shanahan was offered the $10 million a year range of salary and since he accepted approximately $3 million a year less since he took a 5 year $35 million offer from the Redskins, Shanahan forfeited approximately $15 million by NOT taking the Buffalo Bills Head Coaching job. Truthfully, most of us feel that Shanahan's rebuff of the Bills organization and their lucrative offer was hurtful but because of his decision Shanahan can actually say that it wasn't about the money. Shanahan's power hungry, egocentric personality disorder - where he'll be VP of football operations and thereby making the major personnel decisions - may very well be the underlying purpose for wanting to go to a Redskins team that in my opinion is in a worse state than the Bills. Sure they have an owner willing to spend major coin, but as evidenced by their lack of success over the last number of years, spending so much money on multiple Free Agents hasn't proven to be a winning strategy, and it appears that Shanahan and Snyder were made for each other.....but at least he can truthfully say, "It wasn't about the money".....
Malazan Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 you realize that 10 million figure wasn't actually offered, right? It was rumor that Ralph *could* offer that much.
peteski Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 He is also getting $3 million a year from the Broncos so that does equal $10 million.
wonderbread Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 yes. Why not. They guy was making $$ doing nothing. Get over it. He chose "him" we maybe stuck going to the prom with the girl from the AV club. I hear that chick on the flag squad with the headgear doesn't have a date.
Beastly Dareus Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 I thought that Denver's contract with Shanahan became void when the Redskins hired him?
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 He is also getting $3 million a year from the Broncos so that does equal $10 million. No he's not, once he accepts the contract from the Redskins Denver no longer is required to pay him. And I believe he was making $7 Mil with the Broncos.
peteski Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 No he's not, once he accepts the contract from the Redskins Denver no longer is required to pay him. And I believe he was making $7 Mil with the Broncos. Sorry. I read it somewhere that he was still getting part of his contract from the Broncos. I did some research and found out I was wrong. Sorry, it will never happen again.
Thurman#1 Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 you realize that 10 million figure wasn't actually offered, right? It was rumor that Ralph *could* offer that much. No insiders have denied it. Several folks with inside access have reported it. No reason to think it's not true.
Thurman#1 Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 I've given it some time before I posted such a topic, and while I have no real issue with Mike Shanahan not becoming the next Bills coach, I just thought some positive regard should be given to the man despite him not being in Buffalo. If the reports were true, and I don't think we really know for sure, that Shanahan was offered the $10 million a year range of salary and since he accepted approximately $3 million a year less since he took a 5 year $35 million offer from the Redskins, Shanahan forfeited approximately $15 million by NOT taking the Buffalo Bills Head Coaching job. Truthfully, most of us feel that Shanahan's rebuff of the Bills organization and their lucrative offer was hurtful but because of his decision Shanahan can actually say that it wasn't about the money. Shanahan's power hungry, egocentric personality disorder - where he'll be VP of football operations and thereby making the major personnel decisions - may very well be the underlying purpose for wanting to go to a Redskins team that in my opinion is in a worse state than the Bills. Sure they have an owner willing to spend major coin, but as evidenced by their lack of success over the last number of years, spending so much money on multiple Free Agents hasn't proven to be a winning strategy, and it appears that Shanahan and Snyder were made for each other.....but at least he can truthfully say, "It wasn't about the money"..... I think he's serious when he says it's not about the money. But reports said the Bills were willing to give Shanny control over personnel. That's not the reason either. There was one, but probably not either one of those two. One thing might be that Shanny loves to be the center of attention and D.C. is a great place for that, and Buffalo, well, is obviously not. That's one possible reason, but basically we'll never know. It may have just come down to "feel."
Doc Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 Schefter confirmed that the Bills offered nowhere near $10M/year. And Bowlen is paying half of Shanahan's $7M salary for the next 2 years.
Saint Doug Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 It's not about the money, so says the guy who took a job making 7 million a year. If it wasn't about the money, he wouldn't have been sitting on his butt collecting a paycheck this past season. He would have been doing something he supposedly loves, coaching. And why he picked the Skins is a mystery. Its not a stable gig and they are perennial losers, regards how much money they throw at players.
apuszczalowski Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 No insiders have denied it. Several folks who say they have with inside access have reported it. No reason to think it's not true. fixed it since no one employed by the Bills actually confirmed it. As for the contract issue with Denver, I think the only way Denver would be paying anything to him after he gets a new job is if the new job pays less then what he would have been making, then they pay the difference (i.e. if he was making $10 mil a year with Denver and took a deal in Washington worth $7 mil, the Broncos would still be on the hook for $3 mil a year until the Broncos contract would have been up)
1billsfan Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 I'm guessing that NYS taxes are much hirer than VA. That should be factored in when dealing with the big big bucks. The Bills will always have to overpay coaches and FAs partly because of this.
Recommended Posts