Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

We Have To Find A Way To Keep Beast and Gamble

48 posts in this topic

Posted

...we have 5-7 btches on this team that don't conribute jack sht....gamble is one of them...we don't have that luxury especially if you want to get to the NFC championship...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That is not correct. They are part of the same salary cap.

Here's how it works...draft picks are counted at the rookie minimum until they sign a contract. And for most of the offseason, only the top 51 players count against the cap. Since the rookie minimum is the lowest salary, they basically have no impact on the cap until they get signed and until we reach the point that all 53 players on the roster count.

When people talk about a cap for picks, they're talking about a maximum dollar amount assigned to each team for signing their draft picks. Teams cannot exceed this amount. But that doesn't mean they aren't part of the same overall salary cap.

Clear as mud, right?

that's partially correct but from reading, the rookie cap doesn't affect the teams overall cap only their signing bonuses do. Here's an explanation http://russellstreetreport.com/an-explanation-of-how-the-rookie-salary-cap-really-work/.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

that's partially correct but from reading, the rookie cap doesn't affect the teams overall cap only their signing bonuses do. Here's an explanation http://russellstreet...p-really-work/.

Read it again. That article says exactly what I said above only in different words.

Specifically, signing bonuses for rookies once they sign their deal are treated exactly like any other player. In the case of draftees, their bonuses are spread over 4 years for purposes of the salary cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I call 'em like I see em. Sorry it doesn't fly with you ha. I know I'm not alone in my assessment of Gamble. Those stats can be skewed to by QB's who were attacking our other corners more, which probably was a good strategy. They also don't take into account crunch time plays, where Gamble is notably bad. Just off the top of my head like the NFC championship game against Seattle, or that game against Cincinnati where he got smoked by Chad Johnson when all he had to do was extend his hands to deflect or get the pick. Last year was a rebound year for him I will admit openly. But again, with his cap hit, how could he be kept anyway? And is he worth that kind of investment for one rebound year? I say no

You had to go 5 to 6 years back just to make a point.....still not working. If we are gonna cut Gamble its gonna be for cap reasons only. Not because of his play, get over it. He has been the best cornerback the Panthers have ever drafted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You had to go 5 to 6 years back just to make a point.....still not working. If we are gonna cut Gamble its gonna be for cap reasons only. Not because of his play, get over it. He has been the best cornerback the Panthers have ever drafted.

But he is not worth his money. Thomas is better than any Panthers CB in recent memory and has confirmed to me that the key to stopping other teams vs. the pass is to get physical at the line. Gamble has always refused to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

But he is not worth his money. Thomas is better than any Panthers CB in recent memory and has confirmed to me that the key to stopping other teams vs. the pass is to get physical at the line. Gamble has always refused to do that.

That exactly relates to what i said about him being cut because of cap issues.....come on man. And you cant be serious about that Thomas comment, i like the guy and he has upside but your jumping way over the gun with that statement. Lets not overly hype another player just to down Gamble please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree that cutting Gamble is probably the right thing to do, but let's not pretend that he was just another CB. I understand people's traditionalist way of thinking, but stats do not lie. I've said it time and time again... stats do not lie. They might not tell the complete truth, but they absolutely do not lie. Gamble has been a top 5-10 CB in the NFL the last couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree that cutting Gamble is probably the right thing to do, but let's not pretend that he was just another CB. I understand people's traditionalist way of thinking, but stats do not lie. I've said it time and time again... stats do not lie. They might not tell the complete truth, but they absolutely do not lie. Gamble has been a top 5-10 CB in the NFL the last couple of years.

And he will be scooped by another team the day after he is cut or maybe even sooner. Cap issues just make him really hard to keep. Unfortunate.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gamble will restructure unless another team comes along that he thinks gives him a better chance to win. That goes for all the guys you want to cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We can't free up enough space by restructuring everyone. This is the bed we have made and we have hard decisions ahead of us. Restructuring contracts just pushes the hard decisions down the line and puts our cap in even worse shape. It's time to make those hard decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I disagree, if you restructure you make the guys more marketable to get something in return. Also, the players have to make a decision to see if they can make more money elsewhere by not restructuring and I say no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

A proper restructure pays out less money for players on a decline, now I don't see big money restructuring until next year because I think he will only have 10 mill in guarantees left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites