PDA

View Full Version : Redskins Denied Permission to Interview Broncos RB Coach Bobby Turner



ikillz0mbies
01-08-2010, 11:10 PM
The Denver Broncos have denied the Redskins' request to interview running backs coach Bobby Turner for a position on new Coach Mike Shanahan's first staff, a league source said.

Washington sought to bring in Turner, a longtime member of the Broncos' staff under Shanahan, to speak with Redskins officials about possible opportunities as Shanahan, hired Tuesday, reorganizes the coaching staff.

Offensive coordinator Sherman Smith and running backs coach Stump Mitchell, who were hired by former coach Jim Zorn, have coached running backs on other teams.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/mike-shanahan/redskins-denied-permission-to.html?wprss=redskinsinsider

BroncoWave
01-08-2010, 11:11 PM
But NOOOO, McDaniels hates Shanahan guys, isn't it obvious?

ikillz0mbies
01-08-2010, 11:13 PM
I think McDaniels highly values Bobby Turner. If anyone on the staff is out, my bet is on Rick Dennison.

frauschieze
01-08-2010, 11:17 PM
Huh. This somewhat surprises me, but I'm really glad to hear it!

ikillz0mbies
01-08-2010, 11:19 PM
Turner is one of the best position coaches in the game.....

broncophan
01-08-2010, 11:25 PM
Interesting.....Have never heard of a running backs coach being "off limits" to an opposing team.....

Denver Native (Carol)
01-08-2010, 11:30 PM
Interesting.....Have never heard of a running backs coach being "off limits" to an opposing team.....

Isn't it something to do if it's a lateral position they don't have to - only if it would be for a better position.

frauschieze
01-08-2010, 11:35 PM
Isn't it something to do if it's a lateral position they don't have to - only if it would be for a better position.

The way I understand it is that if a coach is under contract, then the team they are with has to give permission for another team to interview in all cases, except if the position they want to interview for is head coach.

So for example, if a defensive backs coach wants to interview for a defensive coordinator position, the team he is under contract with can still say no, even though it would be a promotion. In general though, most teams will allow a coach to interview if the position is a promotion.

slim
01-08-2010, 11:35 PM
Turner is one of the best position coaches in the game.....

Not "one of"...he is the best position coach in the game.

broncophan
01-08-2010, 11:36 PM
Isn't it something to do if it's a lateral position they don't have to - only if it would be for a better position.

you may be right......but if he is THAT great.......why is he "just" a running backs coach????......not trying to downplay his current position......but I would think good running back coaches are a dime a dozen out there.....:confused:
Don't get me wrong....if he is that great.....I am glad we have him .......

Denver Native (Carol)
01-08-2010, 11:47 PM
you may be right......but if he is THAT great.......why is he "just" a running backs coach????......not trying to downplay his current position......but I would think good running back coaches are a dime a dozen out there.....:confused:
Don't get me wrong....if he is that great.....I am glad we have him .......

Not sure - maybe Bobby does not want anything higher. I have heard that he loves working with the running backs. Just found the following:

http://www.windycitygridiron.com/2009/11/25/1173920/rules-on-hiring-nfl-coaches

The only possible coaches that can be hired with no delay are the coaches that are currently unemployed. If you are looking to "steal" away a coach from another NFL team, there are restrictions that limit what you can do. It's not as cut and dry as locating a candidate, offering him more money, and hiring him. If the coach is under contract with another NFL team there are rules that teams must follow.

* You can't hire a coach away from another team if it's a lateral move. You can only hire a contracted coach away if he'll receive a promotion.

frauschieze
01-09-2010, 12:04 AM
Not sure - maybe Bobby does not want anything higher. I have heard that he loves working with the running backs. Just found the following:

http://www.windycitygridiron.com/2009/11/25/1173920/rules-on-hiring-nfl-coaches

The only possible coaches that can be hired with no delay are the coaches that are currently unemployed. If you are looking to "steal" away a coach from another NFL team, there are restrictions that limit what you can do. It's not as cut and dry as locating a candidate, offering him more money, and hiring him. If the coach is under contract with another NFL team there are rules that teams must follow.

* You can't hire a coach away from another team if it's a lateral move. You can only hire a contracted coach away if he'll receive a promotion.

I just verified: NFL has two "tiers" of coaches: Head Coaches and Assistant Coaches. The only time a "promotion" can occur is if a coach becomes a head coach.

See pages 7-10 on the link.
http://www.insidefootball.com/antitamperingpolicy.pdf

Ravage!!!
01-09-2010, 12:18 AM
weird.. because I thought it was HC, Coordinators, assistant coaches. I can't see how a QB or RB coach is on the same pay scale as an OC or DC.

THen.. there is the infamous "assistant head coach".... Turner could be interviewed for the "assistant HC " position...

red98
01-09-2010, 12:55 AM
weird.. because I thought it was HC, Coordinators, assistant coaches. I can't see how a QB or RB coach is on the same pay scale as an OC or DC.

THen.. there is the infamous "assistant head coach".... Turner could be interviewed for the "assistant HC " position...

No. The person must be being promoted to head coach if you want to hire him away, or you need his current team's permission. (also applies to GM for front office people).

Lonestar
01-09-2010, 01:19 AM
The way I understand it is that if a coach is under contract, then the team they are with has to give permission for another team to interview in all cases, except if the position they want to interview for is head coach.

So for example, if a defensive backs coach wants to interview for a defensive coordinator position, the team he is under contract with can still say no, even though it would be a promotion. In general though, most teams will allow a coach to interview if the position is a promotion.

I could be wrong but you always have to have permission to interview anyone under contract..

the only time you should ask for that permission is when they are going to be offered a upwards position.. lateral moves for contracted players are No-NO and most teams will not allow the chit chat ..

sounds like a great move on Joshes part..

WARHORSE
01-09-2010, 01:23 AM
Two possibilities:


One, Turner doesnt want to go, and also doesnt want to tell Shanny no.


Two, Bowlen isnt hip on having his coaches stolen............by former coaches.............that hes still paying 3.5 million a year.

Broncolingus
01-09-2010, 01:26 AM
I have absolutely no problem with this...I've always liked Turner. Wonder if he likes McD?

Agree with Killz, Ricky D looks to be Houston bound...

Interesting...

frauschieze
01-09-2010, 01:32 AM
I could be wrong but you always have to have permission to interview anyone under contract..

the only time you should ask for that permission is when they are going to be offered a upwards position.. lateral moves for contracted players are No-NO and most teams will not allow the chit chat ..

sounds like a great move on Joshes part..

You're right. A team must always ask permission to interview a coach who's under contract. But they also MUST give permission to an assistant coach who would be interviewing for a head coaching position. Makes it kind of seem like it's not really asking in that case.

As far as I know, there's nothing anywhere that states a lateral move (in terms of remaining a postions coach or a coordinator) is not a no-no at all. I'm not sure where you would get that idea, except from the rule of common courtesy, which doesn't always apply in business.

underrated29
01-09-2010, 01:40 AM
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/mike-shanahan/redskins-denied-permission-to.html?wprss=redskinsinsider



Alright JoshMFmcd!





Thats what I'm talking about.

red98
01-09-2010, 01:53 AM
You're right. A team must always ask permission to interview a coach who's under contract. But they also MUST give permission to an assistant coach who would be interviewing for a head coaching position. Makes it kind of seem like it's not really asking in that case.

As far as I know, there's nothing anywhere that states a lateral move (in terms of remaining a postions coach or a coordinator) is not a no-no at all. I'm not sure where you would get that idea, except from the rule of common courtesy, which doesn't always apply in business.

You're right. Here's the full rules for the curious:


NFL RULES FOR CONTACTING COACHES UNDER CONTRACT
“Anti-Tampering Policy” In Plain English
MISCELLANEOUS
TWO TIERS OF COACHING STAFFS: a coach is either the Head Coach or he is an Assistant
Coach, regardless of what title a team may give it’s coaches. The League office only
recognizes Head Coach or Assistant coach when it enforces the Anti-Tampering Rules.
INQUIRY TO LEAGUE OFFICE: Teams may verify and inquire into the contract status of any
NFL Assistant Coach, however the information provided by the League Office is limited to the
term of the contract and no financial information shall be disclosed. No prior permission from
any other club is required, even when other teams are inquiring about one of their assistants.
HEAD COACHES
• In season (including Super Bowl if they are still playing; excluding Pro Bowl), NO contact
with a Head Coach under contract, no permission can even be requested.
• Off season, permission-based contact only.
o We may negotiate into client deals the right to automatic off-season permission;
o Clubs can negotiate a right of first refusal based on their allowing a right of
automatic permission.
• All in-season discussions, requests for permission, or contacts of any kind concerning
future employment of a Head Coach with a club other than his employer club are
prohibited.
• Any Head Coach not under contract by the time preseason training camp begins is not
permitted to participate until his written contract is signed and approved by the League
office.
ASSISTANT COACHES
• Under no circumstances may an Assistant Coach contract contain a Right of First
Refusal in favor of his employer club.
Head Coaching Opportunities for Assistants
• In season (including Super Bowl if they are still playing; excluding Pro Bowl):
NO contact with an Assistant Coach under contract, no permission can even be
requested and no permission can be granted by the employer club.
o This applies to coaches sought for ANY future job, including Head Coach,
subject to the Post Season exception, below.
• The “Post Season Exception”:
If an Assistant Coach is coaching in the post-season, all contact is between team
owners or “operating heads”, and permission must be sought. The Assistant Coach
must be informed of such interest by the owner/operating head, and he must let the
owner/operating head know if he’s interested in interviewing for the position. (There
shall be no other direct or indirect contact between the inquiring club and the Assistant
Coach whom it desires to interview.)
If Permission is granted for an interview during the post-season period, then
1. There can be ONE (1) interview only, and it must be held in the Assistant
Coach’s home team city;
2. For teams earning byes during the Wild Card weekend, the interviews of its
coaches must be conducted before the end of the Wild Card games;
3. For Assistant Coaches whose team win the Wild Card game, then the
interviews must be held after the Wild Card game, and before the Divisional
Playoff game.
4. NO INTERVIEWS MAY BE REQUESTED NOR GRANTED AFTER THE
DIVISIONAL PLAYOFF WEEKEND FOR ANY ASSISTANT COACH WHOSE
TEAM IS STILL PLAYING IN THE POST SEASON.
Miscellaneous:
• Permission cannot be granted selectively by an Assistant Coach’s team. If a
team grants permission to interview one of its coaches to one team, it MUST
grant permission to all teams requesting it.
• FOR HEAD COACH CANDIDATES, MANDATORY PERMISSION AFTER SEASON
ENDS:
If an Assistant Coach is under contract for the NEXT season, AND his current season
(including post-season) is over, then:
o An Assistant Coach MUST be given permission to discuss a Head Coaching
opportunity if the request comes from the day of their last game, through March
1st.
o After March 1st, a club is not required to grant permission for another team to
interview any of its Assistant Coaches.
LATERAL OPPORTUNITIES
• Assistant coach – to – Non Head Coach opportunities
o Note: “promotions” to coordinator level are NOT promotions under this policy; a
coach is either an Assistant Coach or a Head Coach, period.• Teams retain exclusive rights to an Assistant Coach who just completed the final
season under contract until:
o The Tuesday following15 days after the final Monday Night Football game of the
regular season, if the Assistant Coaches team is not in the playoffs
o The 3rd Tuesday after the Assistant Coaches final playoff game (including Super
Bowl), but in no event later than the expiration date in the coaches contract.
o This 3 week exclusivity period CAN be waived by the coach’s team.
• Coaches Not Under Written Contract:
o If an Assistant Coach is working without a contract in effect (i.e., hasn’t yet
signed his deal, his old deal lapsed, no new deal reached, but he’s still working
for the club), permission MUST be granted even if coach continues to be paid on
a non contract basis, and even if it is after March 1st.
o Any Assistant Coach not under contract by the time preseason training camp
begins is not permitted to participate until his written contract is signed and
approved by the League office.Coaching Free Agency for Lateral Moves

Ziggy
01-09-2010, 06:17 AM
According to the rules then, the Broncos don't have to let Dennison go either. this will be an interesting offseason.

Nomad
01-09-2010, 07:48 AM
Phew:wipesbrow:, that was a jungle of posts to go through!! Thanks red98 for the rules page!!

Well, if the BRONCOS aren't gonna let Turner go then more than likely he would have gotten a pay raise with the Redskins, maybe the BRONCOS could give him a little pay raise because he is such an asset to the team!! just saying!!

Nomad
01-09-2010, 07:59 AM
According to the rules then, the Broncos don't have to let Dennison go either. this will be an interesting offseason.

If they would who'd be a good replacement for him?? Like you said in another post, this Oline was plagued with injuries again, so I guess even good coaches can't overcome that!! Then again if coaches are that good, why would they be on the market anyway!!

elsid13
01-09-2010, 08:54 AM
According to the rules then, the Broncos don't have to let Dennison go either. this will be an interesting offseason.

It also be a dick move, especial since it not a team in the AFCW. Opportunities for coordinator position are rare and are a jumping stone for HC position, to deny one of your employees that opportunity is a shitty move.

Nomad
01-09-2010, 09:06 AM
It also be a dick move, especial since it not a team in the AFCW. Opportunities for coordinator position are rare and are a jumping stone for HC position, to deny one of your employees that opportunity is a shitty move.

I would agree if this were the case and they were doing it out of spite (which could never be proven unless they come out and say so)

broncofaninfla
01-09-2010, 09:51 AM
I'm torn on this. I'm glad we have Turner but kind of feel sorry for him if he isn't given the right to leave if he wants to. It's not like he is in a great spot right now. He is being asked to coach running backs in a sub par scheme at best now and has been given a 1st round rookie running back that quiet frankly isn't as good as the rookie free agents we've had in the past. Add to that our new coach shows a penchant for pointing fingers publicly who's to say he won't point that finger at Turner one day? Again glad we have him but I wonder if we would have granted permission if the team calling wasn't Washington?

Nomad
01-09-2010, 09:55 AM
I'm torn on this. I'm glad we have Turner but kind of feel sorry for him if he isn't given the right to leave if he wants to. It's not like he is in a great spot right now. He is being asked to coach running backs in a sub par scheme at best now and has been given a 1st round rookie running back that quiet frankly isn't as good as the rookie free agents we've had in the past. Add to that our new coach shows a penchant for pointing fingers publicly who's to say he won't point that finger at Turner one day? Again glad we have him but I wonder if we would have granted permission if the team calling wasn't Washington?

That's why I say pay him a little more to show that he is appreciated here for his work and the organization isn't doing it out of spite!!

broncofaninfla
01-09-2010, 09:58 AM
I would agree if this were the case and they were doing it out of spite (which could never be proven unless they come out and say so)


Good point!

frauschieze
01-09-2010, 10:51 AM
I'm torn on this. I'm glad we have Turner but kind of feel sorry for him if he isn't given the right to leave if he wants to. It's not like he is in a great spot right now. He is being asked to coach running backs in a sub par scheme at best now and has been given a 1st round rookie running back that quiet frankly isn't as good as the rookie free agents we've had in the past. Add to that our new coach shows a penchant for pointing fingers publicly who's to say he won't point that finger at Turner one day? Again glad we have him but I wonder if we would have granted permission if the team calling wasn't Washington?

Interesting thoughts for sure. They've crossed my mind. I guess the bottom line is that he's under contract, just like players are. It doesn't really matter if he wanted to leave or not.

What I'm hoping is that the reason the Broncos denied permission is because they truly recognize Turner's abilities and really want him to be a part of the organization. I REALLY hope it's not just to be a dick to Shanahan. That could affect possible trade scenarios for us later.

Northman
01-09-2010, 11:05 AM
It also be a dick move, especial since it not a team in the AFCW. Opportunities for coordinator position are rare and are a jumping stone for HC position, to deny one of your employees that opportunity is a shitty move.

Thats a bit of stretch at this time. There's no indication that Mcd is holding him back out of spite. Good grief.

frauschieze
01-09-2010, 11:10 AM
Thats a bit of stretch at this time. There's no indication that Mcd is holding him back out of spite. Good grief.

As far as I know, there hasn't been anything that's said that the Broncos denied Dennison an interview anywhere. Am I missing something?

Northman
01-09-2010, 11:12 AM
As far as I know, there hasn't been anything that's said that the Broncos denied Dennison an interview anywhere. Am I missing something?

Im talking about Turner.

Denver Native (Carol)
01-09-2010, 11:12 AM
It also be a dick move, especial since it not a team in the AFCW. Opportunities for coordinator position are rare and are a jumping stone for HC position, to deny one of your employees that opportunity is a shitty move.

Dennison's name has been thrown out to replace Kyle Shanahan in Houston, as OC. Unless I missed something, the Broncos have not denied Dennison permission to talk to Houston.

In Turner's case, why should the Broncos let him go to Washington, then have to replace him here. Again, unless I missed something, it will be a lateral move only. Shanahan has already named his son to be OC in Washington.

frauschieze
01-09-2010, 11:16 AM
Im talking about Turner.

Ah. Elsid was talking about Dennison. :D

Northman
01-09-2010, 11:29 AM
Ah. Elsid was talking about Dennison. :D

Either way, my post still stands. Nothing has shown that McD is holding anyone back out of spite. For all we know McD likes both and wants them to stay.

underrated29
01-09-2010, 11:31 AM
i like dennison he is a great OL coach, but great in ZBS, i am sure he is good in the trap/pull/power scheme, but its not his bread and butter. I would like to keep him, but I doubt he stays and further more i think its better for him to go to was or houston or somewhere else.

Ravage!!!
01-09-2010, 11:54 AM
i like dennison he is a great OL coach, but great in ZBS, i am sure he is good in the trap/pull/power scheme, but its not his bread and butter. I would like to keep him, but I doubt he stays and further more i think its better for him to go to was or houston or somewhere else.

yeah.. I think that Dennison would be on his way out, anyway, simply because we are moving away from teh ZBS. Its like keeping a 43 DC when you want to run the 34. Just not a good fit.

broncofaninfla
01-09-2010, 12:40 PM
Broncos not letting Shanahan raid coaching staff

Posted by Michael David Smith on January 9, 2010 10:52 AM ET
As Josh Alper noted in today's one-liners, the Broncos have told running backs coach Bobby Turner he can't talk to the Redskins, who would like him to re-join Mike Shanahan in Washington.

The Denver Post has reported that in addition to Turner, Broncos strength and conditioning coach Rich Tuten, assistant strength coach Greg Saporta, special-teams assistant Keith Burns and director of football administration Mike Bluem all were longtime Shanahan associates who would likely be sought after by the Redskins. But if the Broncos won't let Turner go, it stands to reason they wouldn't let other team employees who are under contract leave, either.

The Broncos' handling of Turner spotlights the way different teams handle requests to interview their assistants differently.

The Houston Texans, for instance, were willing to allow offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan to join his father's staff in Washington. But when the Texans wanted to interview Titans offensive line coach Mike Munchak to fill Kyle Shanahan's place, the Titans said no.

When Rod Marinelli left the Tampa Bay Buccaneers to become head coach of the Detroit Lions, he wanted to bring his son-in-law, Bucs linebackers coach Joe Barry, with him as Lions defensive coordinator. But the Bucs made Barry honor the final year of his contract.

In Denver, it appears that the Broncos will make their assistants honor their contracts, rather than letting Shanahan raid their staff.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-09-2010, 01:03 PM
Probably a good thing for McDaniels that Bellicheat doesn't give a shit about other teams interviewing his staff, huh?

Why would you not allow another team to interview someone? It's not like they're just laying claim to them. What, is Josh worried that Turner doesn't have enough LOYALTY TO THE TEAM and will LEAVE FOR GREENER PASTURES if the opportunity presents itself?

Gee, makes Turner sound like that unhappy Scheffler douche bag that everyone hates all of a sudden for not wanting to be here. Sounds like BUSINESS to me.

Northman
01-09-2010, 01:06 PM
Probably a good thing for McDaniels that Bellicheat doesn't give a shit about other teams interviewing his staff, huh?

Why would you not allow another team to interview someone? It's not like they're just laying claim to them. What, is Josh worried that Turner doesn't have enough LOYALTY TO THE TEAM and will LEAVE FOR GREENER PASTURES if the opportunity presents itself?

Gee, makes Turner sound like that unhappy Scheffler douche bag that everyone hates all of a sudden for not wanting to be here. Sounds like BUSINESS to me.

Yea, you got that right. Scheff is a douchbag.

nevcraw
01-09-2010, 05:40 PM
If they would who'd be a good replacement for him?? Like you said in another post, this Oline was plagued with injuries again, so I guess even good coaches can't overcome that!! Then again if coaches are that good, why would they be on the market anyway!!

losing Harris is hardly what one would call plagued.. They benched hamilton for Hochstein, who got hurt at the end of the season.
The shift in offensive philosphy (right or wrong) and type of QB is what plgued the OL.

arapaho2
01-10-2010, 12:48 AM
No. The person must be being promoted to head coach if you want to hire him away, or you need his current team's permission. (also applies to GM for front office people).


wrong shanny did it a couple times....or at least labeled a coach assistant hc...so the only thing he could be hired for was..hc

Elevation inc
01-10-2010, 07:24 AM
this is smart, rumor was shanny offered the RB's position with associate assistnat head coach title...its a glorified position title and not a promotion, the next promotion for turner is to become cordinator....kyle shanahan has the role, so its lateral for the skins to hire turner not a promotion, on that note guess MCd really does know who is valuable and who isnt to this team....

haters unite on 3....HAHAHA

Elevation inc
01-10-2010, 07:27 AM
losing Harris is hardly what one would call plagued.. They benched hamilton for Hochstein, who got hurt at the end of the season.
The shift in offensive philosphy (right or wrong) and type of QB is what plgued the OL.

55% of our offense ran last year under shanny and cutler used that same philosphy we employed this year, throw it alot, bubble screens, underneath routes, shotgun runs and traps.....people juts forget that....


we havent been a fully zbs oriented team since the 2005 season....even less when cutler entered the line-up....

Denver Native (Carol)
01-10-2010, 08:36 AM
http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_14158159

Bobby Turner inadvertently drew a battle line between the Broncos and Mike Shanahan last week.

On second thought, let's not be so trite as to call it a battle line. Let's call it the definition of common sense.

Soon after Shanahan became the new head coach of the Washington Redskins, he sought permission to hire Turner away from the Broncos to be his running backs coach. Because it was a lateral move, Broncos coach Josh McDaniels refused. Even if Shanahan attempted to skirt the issue by giving Turner one of those pseudo "associate head coach" titles, the reality in the NFL is either you're a position coach or you're a coordinator.

And Kyle Shanahan will be the Redskins' offensive coordinator. So McDaniels said no.

Before getting swept up in the pack mentality that considers McDaniels a bad guy, ask this: Do you want what's best for the Broncos or what's best for Shanahan?

Because Shanahan is no longer a friend of the Broncos. This is nothing personal. Shanahan is a good man. He will always be a friend to the surrounding Broncos community.

But this is business. And in the business of football, what good does it do the Broncos to have Turner work for the Redskins?

By saying no, McDaniels did Turner a favor. If teams want him so bad, offer Turner a long-overdue promotion to offensive coordinator. Now, there would be a problem if McDaniels prevented Rick Dennison from becoming an offensive coordinator for Gary Kubiak and the Houston Texans. But I don't think McDaniels would do that.

Look, as McDaniels continues to grow as a head coach, it wouldn't hurt if he gained a little more political savvy. He is a man of admirable convictions and honesty. And there can be an underlying slyness among those who are consciously suave. But he could benefit from refining the delicate skill that is making tough decisions without creating so much polarization.

The Turner decision, however, requires no such political dexterity. Turner is a Bronco. Shanahan is not.

Nomad
01-10-2010, 10:06 AM
I was one who had mentioned that I hoped McDaniels wasn't doing it out of spite. I'm glad to see he did the right thing.

red98
01-10-2010, 10:21 AM
wrong shanny did it a couple times....or at least labeled a coach assistant hc...so the only thing he could be hired for was..hc

The full list of rules is in post #20 on this thread. Here's the relevant part:

LATERAL OPPORTUNITIES
• Assistant coach – to – Non Head Coach opportunities
o Note: “promotions” to coordinator level are NOT promotions under this policy; a
coach is either an Assistant Coach or a Head Coach, period.•