Stroud: Money is an issue in head coaching search

[bucfan26]

I think Stroud sometimes purposely plays the role of antagonist.

yup, which only hurts his credibility.

[caradoc]

What credibility?

Dr. proprioception?


Tampa just has terrible sports coverage.

[DefenseWins]

To the few that still defend the Glazers investment in this team...

This is business, money talks. They spend the least.

If you're honest with yourself you'll begin every statement in defense of the Glazers with: "Even though the Glazers have spent the least in the league in 8 years, I still have faith that.....(fill in the blank".

Starting discussions without first recognizing this FACT is not an honest attempt.

[BucBalla85]

What credibility?

Dr. proprioception?


Tampa just has terrible sports coverage.

More like awful sports coverage.

[DanTurksGhost]

Let's see. When we hired a young HC it was because he would be cheap wanting his first shot. Now that we're looking at a seasoned coach it's because a old coach would be cheap to get another shot.

And whatever coach they hire, he's going to make more money than Raheem Morris. And his assistants are going to make more money than the previous assistants. If the Glazers wanted to go the cheapest route, they'd have retained the existing staff.

[VinBucFan]

I think Stroud sometimes purposely plays the role of antagonist.

He does and the problem is he knows he is playing to an audience who pays little attention to detail.  In the scheme of an NFL budget  even an "expensive" high profile coach is a very small line item. The top paid coaches in the league only make about $7 million per.  Many NFL head coaches earning $3 -4 million per year. The notion that the Bucs would skimp on a coach to save 2 or 3 million per year is  . . .  well . . . stupid.  $2 or $3 million is about 1% of a typical teams revenue budget.  Kind of like saying you would pick the KIA over a Mercedes because the Mercedes is $300 more even though you have $300K income.

For all you crazy ManU conspiracy fanatics out there, if you buy Strouds comment then you think the Glazers, who are about to float a nearly $1 BILLION stock offering, would not hire a premium NFL head coach to save what amounts to only about 4% of the current ANNUAL interest service and a TINY FRACTION of that teams'' PROFTABLE operating budget.

  Seriously . . .  the idea is ridiculous, but it plays to an audience and I supposed Stroud knows that.

[VinBucFan]

If you're honest with yourself you'll begin every statement in defense of the Glazers with: "Even though the Glazers have spent the least in the league in 8 years

LOL

USATODAY has not yet published 2010 figures but starting with 09 going backwards, the truth is this (based on total payroll)

2009 --- Chiefs had lowest payroll, Bucs were second lowest
2008 --- 9 teams had lower payroll than the Bucs
2007 -- 9 teams with lower payroll (Giants were the lowest, anyone think of the Giants as "cheap")
2006 -- Raiders were lowest (anyone think of Davis as shy with $?)
2005 -- 6 teams spent less
2004 -- 16 teams spent less
2003 -- 2nd in the league in payroll
2002 -- we were roughly middle of the pack when we won the SB, what does that say about the link

Payroll goes up and down.  It's no coincidence that the Bucs were among the least successful drafters during this time period, both due to lack of picks and poor selection.  Again, simple way to think of it. 2005 we sign Caddy, he is no longer on our payroll. The Packers signed Rodgers who is still on their payroll at $65 million.