Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Archived

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

top dawg

You think Hardy saw Michael Bennett's remarks on a "discount"?

Recommended Posts

Besides for the money that IS guaranteed...lol. 

 

which is only a % of  money that the contract was signed for. compare that to other sports NBA, MLB who have or are very close to having fully guaranteed contracts. plus which of the 3 is the most violent, tearing your body up, and does more damage to you physically/ mentally  over the years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


How would someone like it if their boss came to them and asked them to take a pay cut(hometown discount) lol...If anyone thinks any NFL Player would take a hometown discount, they are out of their mind.

 

Before anyone brings up the Mike Tolbert situation let me explain. I believe that the only reason Tolbert came to play for us for less money than what the Chargers offered him has a lot to do with cost of living in San Diego vs Charlotte. In terms of living expenses i bet what he was offered by SD was comparable to what he was offered by us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

which is only a % of  money that the contract was signed for. compare that to other sports NBA, MLB who have or are very close to having fully guaranteed contracts. plus which of the 3 is the most violent, tearing your body up, and does more damage to you physically/ mentally  over the years?

 

Unless you're a drafted rookie under the new CBA...their contracts are 100% guaranteed.

 

If there were no such thing as guaranteed contracts in the NFL, we wouldn't have millions of dollars of our salary cap going to players that are no longer on the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you're a drafted rookie under the new CBA...their contracts are 100% guaranteed.

 

If there were no such thing as guaranteed contracts in the NFL, we wouldn't have millions of dollars of our salary cap going to players that are no longer on the team.

 

It depends on the contract. I don''t know how you can say that their contracts are 100 percent guaranteed, when most of the time only a portion of the contract is actually guaranteed. Am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the contract. I don''t know how you can say that their contracts are 100 percent guaranteed, when most of the time only a portion of the contract is actually guaranteed. Am I missing something?

 

No, you're right. My bad.

 

Cam's deal was 4 years 22 million fully guaranteed. I think it is the case that a lot of first round guys have their contracts fully guaranteed but late-first rounders and later depend on the team. You could have 3.5 years guaranteed or 3 years, and maybe less the later you're drafted. But still, when they're given 4 year deals, 75-80% guarantees are not bad.

 

I understand that with the exception of top draft picks no NFL contracts are 100% guaranteed, but almost all of them DO have guaranteed money. Just because it's not 100% doesn't mean it's not guaranteed. That's just a matter of semantics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you're a drafted rookie under the new CBA...their contracts are 100% guaranteed.

 

If there were no such thing as guaranteed contracts in the NFL, we wouldn't have millions of dollars of our salary cap going to players that are no longer on the team.

Base salaries aren't guaranteed, only bonuses (signing, roster, workout, etc.) and other incentives are guaranteed.  Player salaries only become guaranteed if the player is on the roster for week one of the current season...but salaries for subsequent seasons do not get guaranteed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure. Everything hardy has said makes me believe he won't be a panther next year. People need to prepare theirselves for that. It's a 99% chance.

thinking about improvement in other areas caused me to be over him  already! DO IT NOW! #lookingforward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardy's salary until this year has basically what you would pay a good depth player (and this year he's just making what you would pay a mediocre starting DE), so the other two years he was not getting overpaid, and the past two he has been playing like someone getting paid 10 times what he's making now. It's nowhere near an even deal.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/greg-hardy/

 

 

Besides, you didn't answer my question. Taking Hardy out of the equation completely, do teams pay players extra after the contract is over if they outperform their contract? Are the Seahawks going to pay Wilson the millions extra he should be making before they have to give him a long term deal?

 

I did answer your question you just didnt like the answer. There is also the fact most team try to resign good player before they become FAs(like Hardy) but some like to gamble and go for the cash. So yes they do try to give them extra money for overperforming and some take it and some dont. Just ask Capt, DG offered him a decent contract for his skills but he wanted the most cash he could get. Only reason he was a Panther last year was because no one wanted him. So he lost his contract and had to play for the min. So he gave up being payed what he was worth for the hope he would get a random, but it was his choice.

 

So once again, You are the weakest link, good bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell Wilson is a good example.  Here's a guy that has out performed is contract exponentially.  But he's made a lot more money then his on paper salary if you just look at endorsements....mainly from Xbox1, and he'll probably be on the next Madden cover......whatever that pays.

 

Greg Hardy has definitely earned a massive raise, but he's only been dominant for 1 season.  If he thinks he deserves a high contract because he thinks he deserves back pay...well....bye.

 

Lets not forget he was playing against a rookie back up against the Saints.  He got shut out in the first match up.  Without that game against the Saints we're not even talking big money.  

 

Anyway he needs to send Terron Armstead a nice watch or something.

 

Thats what happens with DEs. Hardy is a good DE but not worth the scarifies of the whole team. It sucks be we knew when he would not take an extension last year he was going for the money. I say let him, he can go play for the Raiders or the Vikes and lose for 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did answer your question you just didnt like the answer. There is also the fact most team try to resign good player before they become FAs(like Hardy) but some like to gamble and go for the cash. So yes they do try to give them extra money for overperforming and some take it and some dont. Just ask Capt, DG offered him a decent contract for his skills but he wanted the most cash he could get. Only reason he was a Panther last year was because no one wanted him. So he lost his contract and had to play for the min. So he gave up being payed what he was worth for the hope he would get a random, but it was his choice.

 

So once again, You are the weakest link, good bye.

 

Since you don't seem to have the capacity to pick up my point, I'll spell it out for you more clearly.

 

You said that players are "greedy" when they try to get as large of a contract as they can, because it's possible that they could underperform and wouldn't give any of the money back. However, despite the red herrings and strawmen you have been trying to answer my question with, teams who have a player that performs to a higher level than his contract, they DO NOT pay their players retroactively as a reward for past performance. They might offer a larger contract next time, but they are paying for predicted future performance, not as a reward for past performance. They are simply competing with every other team for the player's future services.

 

And when teams offer to extend contracts, it's to prevent players from hitting free agency, it's not as a reward. Here's another hypothetical for you, although I'm doubtful you will understand this one either considering your track record. If a player was making league minimum over a season but still ended up breaking records and winning MVP, then destroyed his knee in the last game of the season and had to retire, would his team give him the millions he should have earned over the season anyway?

If your answer is no (and no is the correct answer), then your argument about players being greedy because they might underperform falls apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure. Everything hardy has said makes me believe he won't be a panther next year. People need to prepare theirselves for that. It's a 99% chance.

 

Pretty much.

 

Most of his discussion has been about etting a big payday.  Just don't see us being the top bidder.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you don't seem to have the capacity to pick up my point, I'll spell it out for you more clearly.

 

You said that players are "greedy" when they try to get as large of a contract as they can, because it's possible that they could underperform and wouldn't give any of the money back. However, despite the red herrings and strawmen you have been trying to answer my question with, teams who have a player that performs to a higher level than his contract, they DO NOT pay their players retroactively as a reward for past performance. They might offer a larger contract next time, but they are paying for predicted future performance, not as a reward for past performance. They are simply competing with every other team for the player's future services.

 

And when teams offer to extend contracts, it's to prevent players from hitting free agency, it's not as a reward. Here's another hypothetical for you, although I'm doubtful you will understand this one either considering your track record. If a player was making league minimum over a season but still ended up breaking records and winning MVP, then destroyed his knee in the last game of the season and had to retire, would his team give him the millions he should have earned over the season anyway?

If your answer is no (and no is the correct answer), then your argument about players being greedy because they might underperform falls apart.

 

I see your point. I just dont agree with it nor think it makes much sense. Players that perform get paid, simple as that. Some are greedy some are not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you're a drafted rookie under the new CBA...their contracts are 100% guaranteed.

If there were no such thing as guaranteed contracts in the NFL, we wouldn't have millions of dollars of our salary cap going to players that are no longer on the team.

Again some money is guaranteed, but not all. I can sign a deal for 5 years for $35 mill, but get guaranteed only $15 mill. That $15 I will see, I might see the rest of the money on that contract. Compare that to other leagues, I will see all or very close to that $35 mill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      19,328
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    HeyMsCarter
    Joined
  • Topics

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      140,720
    • Total Posts
      4,482,319
×