Archived

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

KissMyConverse

According to Person we're keeping Williams...

155 posts in this topic

exactly. pure speculation on behalf of person with this article.

Agreed.

“Can we keep both of them? Again, decisions have to be made. I don't see why not.”

Full quote.

No where so I read a solidified answer to the question. This could be interpreted in either side of the argument.

I'm leaning more to the side of, "Restructure or be cut." The decision that have to be made aren't necessarily for the benefit of Williams. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

“Can we keep both of them? Again, decisions have to be made. I don't see why not.”

Full quote.

No where so I read a solidified answer to the question. This could be interpreted in either side of the argument.

I'm leaning more to the side of, "Restructure or be cut." The decision that have to be made aren't necessarily for the benefit of Williams. Just saying.

exactly. pure speculation on behalf of person with this article.

He credits a source close to the situation with this information. Not deriving this article from that one quote by Gettleman.

Now, how credible the source is, that I have no idea. But it isn't speculation, but it could be purposely false info to try and generate a trade market for Williams or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He credits a source close to the situation with this information. Not deriving this article from that one quote by Gettleman.

Now, how credible the source is, that I have no idea. But it isn't speculation, but it could be purposely false info to try and generate a trade market for Williams or something.

Duly noted..

True as that may be Teeray, it's Joe Freaking Person we're talking about here. He's behind on a lot of things and never breaks out news about the team. Heck other beat writers from other teams have broken stories about the Panthers more often than Joe has ever done.

Heck we have some huddlers with better connections or inside sources than Person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see where or how is it that we're keeping Williams. If it's just because Gettleman said, "I don't see why not." That's not enough to actually believe williams will stay here.

Had he said. "Yes, there are no plans to cut Williams." Then I would believe it. This sounds more like he's putting the ball on Williams court. I'm expecting a restructure.

Keep in mind that he also said that he would do what he has to do.

Exactly, means he could tell Williams we would love for you to stay....but we rip up that deal or you must go.

Giants also have told RBs to kick rocks when it comes to paying them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giants didn't have nearly that kind of money and didnt invest nearly as much resources in getting and keeping RBs.

where they focused their efforts was in making sure WR was stocked. RBs were considered expendable and easily replaceable.

Yes they do. They franchised tagged Brandon Jacobs and gave him a new contract when they already had Bradshaw. They also gave Bradshaw a new contract and drafted Wilson. They are both not on the team now because of cap and injury issues But the point is they gave them new contracts for production just like we did and drafted another guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheesh what a huge stretch that article uses to back this claim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duly noted..

True as that may be Teeray, it's Joe Freaking Person we're talking about here. He's behind on a lot of things and never breaks out news about the team. Heck other beat writers from other teams have broken stories about the Panthers more often than Joe has ever done.

Heck we have some huddlers with better connections or inside sources than Person.

Touche.

That is why I didn't put up much of a fight over the info. Just noting that he wasn't extrapolating from a quote by Gettleman in a press conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cutting him now serves no purpose.....cutting him after June 1 saves us some money but we lose his services.I think Gettlemen knows when the time will be right but for now until march 12th DWILL will stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B creates 4.6 million dead money in 14, thats 800k more than we are saving in 13. So have the cap room now and fug ourselves in the future is what you wanna do.

Pay him 9.6 million over the next 2 years(4.8 million per year in 13 and 14) to never play another down for us

If we are going the June 1st route to save money then its a million times better to do it next year.

The option I prefer

If we cut him in 14 we save 6 million in 14 and 7 million in 15. Thats 21 million in savings . 11.5 million per year savings in 2 years

The option you prefer

If we cut him now we save 3.8 million in 13 and 4.6 million in 14 and 10.2 million in 15 thats 18.6 million savings over 3 years. 6.2 million per year savings over 3 years

tl; dr save 21 million in cap hits thru 15 and get to keep him for 13. or save 18.6 million in cap hits through 2015 and he never plays another down.

These numbers are not correct.

Cut him post June 1 this year and we save 5.0 this year, 2.8 next year, and 10.2 in year 3, for a total of 18 million, or an average of 6 a year.

Cut him pre June 1 next year and we save 0 this year, his cap hit in year 2 is 400,000 higher than currently scheduled, and 10.2 in year 3, for a total savings of 9.8 million, or an average of 3.3 million a year.

Cut him post June 1 next year and we save 0 this year, 6 million next year and 7 million in year 3, for a total of 13.0 million, or an average of 4.3 million a year.

The worst option is the one you are advocating. Either cut him post June 1 this year or cut him post June 1 next year. The greatest cap savings are to cut him post June 1 this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These numbers are not correct.

Cut him post June 1 this year and we save 5.0 this year, 2.8 next year, and 10.2 in year 3, for a total of 18 million, or an average of 6 a year.

Cut him pre June 1 next year and we save 0 this year, his cap hit in year 2 is 400,000 higher than currently scheduled, and 10.2 in year 3, for a total savings of 9.8 million, or an average of 3.3 million a year.

Cut him post June 1 next year and we save 0 this year, 6 million next year and 7 million in year 3, for a total of 13.0 million, or an average of 4.3 million a year.

The worst option is the one you are advocating. Either cut him post June 1 this year or cut him post June 1 next year. The greatest cap savings are to cut him post June 1 this year.

Thanks for the info. How do you get these figures? It seems like people have like 3 or 4 different views on the cap and I never know which one is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

int main(0)

{

while(doesn't have WRs)

{

To give carries to all RBs:

1st down: Stewart rush up the middle for 2 yards.

2nd down: Williams toward the sideline for a 3 yard skimper.

3rd down: Cam on a play action pass. Sorry your running game not respected, no receiver open. Incomplete pass

4th down: punt

}

team start 0-7.

Blame it all on a Cam junior slump.

return (we need a 'traditional' passer for carolina);

}

The program has been written folks. Only a good draft can hack it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These numbers are not correct.

Cut him post June 1 this year and we save 5.0 this year, 2.8 next year, and 10.2 in year 3, for a total of 18 million, or an average of 6 a year.

Cut him pre June 1 next year and we save 0 this year, his cap hit in year 2 is 400,000 higher than currently scheduled, and 10.2 in year 3, for a total savings of 9.8 million, or an average of 3.3 million a year.

Cut him post June 1 next year and we save 0 this year, 6 million next year and 7 million in year 3, for a total of 13.0 million, or an average of 4.3 million a year.

The worst option is the one you are advocating. Either cut him post June 1 this year or cut him post June 1 next year. The greatest cap savings are to cut him post June 1 this year.

It is hard to say you are saving money when you are creating almost 10 million in dead cap space over the next 2 seasons. You aren't saving anything, you are reducing the cap number at the expense of not having your starting running back and franchise career leader. Obviously the best scenario is to restructure him so that we can afford to keep him and still save the needed cap room. I don't know all the ins and outs but I imagine that something can be worked out that saves some cap room and still doesn't put us in cap hell down the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites