panthers55

They aren't saying anything because they have said repeatedly that you need to ask Burns and he isn't talking. Burns isn't going to hold out but if he says that up front regardless of the negotiations he just gave away a huge bargaining chip and he isn't doing that. The Wednesday deadline was the point at which he had to report if he was going to play this weekend.

Why practice yesterday and today if he isn't planning to play??

This was yesterday when he practiced. https://www.panthers.com/news/notebook-brian-burns-hasn-t-made-himself-a-distraction-frank-reich-says#:~:text=CHARLOTTE – Outside linebacker Brian Burns,termed a "personal matter." You keep showing you don't have a clue

In order to play against Atlanta he would have to show up by Wednesday. I read he was at practice Wednesday. I think actions speak louder than words. Did you hear he wasn't at practice Wednesday or today?

Here are two. I have lots more but this was in the last week. https://clutchpoints.com/panthers-news-brian-burns-stance-on-not-holding-out-amid-contract-negotiation-will-excite-carolina-fans https://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/37896/ive-got-to-be-here-why-panthers-brian-burns-isnt-holding-out

Look at every interview he has done in the last month.

Burns is back at practice and says he plans to play. Why pages after pages about what he will lose when he has been at practice all this week?

Not saying there isn't a limit just saying that the cap isn't the big issue you and others make it out to be. Again we all agree there is a salary cap, you don't need to say it over and over when everyone agrees there is a number that goes up most every year. The myth is that is can't be easily manipulated to the point that it doesn't stop you from getting the players you want or kills your roster if you pay someone a premium like Burns which is what the whole conversation is about. Or that you can't spend more cash in a year than the cap allows So once again there is a cap but it is is not the impediment you and others suggest. And given it can be manipulated so easily, it really isn't a problem for creative cap managers I would hardly use Gettleman as an example of what to do. He was largely a disaster with his fruit basket turnover every year.

One thought. Maybe we should wait to see what the actual contract says before whining about how much he is getting. If it is Bosa money then bitch, otherwise it is rather premature.

Thanks for the validation. If you think it is wrong I must be on the right track.

Then you restructure a few guys and get under the cap again like New Orleans did this year to sign Carr. Again the cap is just a number that teams get around a dozen ways. The idea that you can't manipulate it to get who you want is the myth. So yeah it isn't the big impediment that you and others here think it is.

Of course the money doesn't disappear. That is an extreme mischaracterization. But if you actually spend 280 million a year and only have to account for 250 in any one year, it is gone for now given the NFL stands for Not For Long. And you can keep kicking the excess down the line which seems what all the teams are doing these days. So it didn't disappear but it doesn't all show up on the salary cap in the year it was paid. Seems if you aren't doing that then you are at a competitive disadvantage.

The myth is not that there is a cap. Of course there is a cap. The myth is that you can't sign the players you want or need because of the cap. What I said was that there are many ways to manipulate the cap so it isn't worth all the angst that everyone here gives it. Look at Hill as an example. You really think Kansas City couldn't have kept Hill if they really wanted to? Of course they could but it might mean coaching up some cheap rookies and UDFAs instead of JAG vets who cost 5 times as much and will still be backups. The myth is that the cap, if it 250 million, is all you can spend and it is the same for everyone. Not true at all. Cash over cap through signing bonuses and restructures allows a team to spend 10s of millions more that gets prorated. Add on some voidable years and incentives and you can fit most any salary you want under the salary cap without having to gut your roster in the process. It favors owners like Tepper who have deep pockets and want to spend the money to bring a SB to Charlotte one day. They can spend cash over cap to get players just like he spent big bucks for coaches but didn't have to worry about a salary cap or have to disclose the salaries.

Damn good question. Looking at how we could have been offensively with him here, I think it was a mistake. But I know they were thinking to get as many picks as they could while he was healthy given his injury concerns. It wasn't all about the money.

Ancient history. The contracts we have given out lately appear much better but you can always find a few bad ones

No it doesnt matter what the overall numbers are. The only money that matters is guaranteed money. Were voidable years a thing 15 years ago? GMs find additional ways to manipulate the cap and will continue to find new ways to do it. All of this angst is just overblown like usual. Did CMC's contract keep us from signing other folks? The only time teams talk about the cap is when they want to us it to keep from paying someone or justify cutting someone. Teams like Tampa are in cap he'll but it was by their own choosing

Just the truth.

The issue is the guaranteed money. The 122 guaranteed is a much bigger issue than the 170 overall. How many players actually get all that money? Much less than you think.

But that is the big myth. The cap can be manipulated a dozen ways and teams like New Orleans have consistently got who they wanted and paid whatever. They paid a ton for Carr when they were over the cap and are favorites to win the division. So no you and others here are wrong in your thinking that the cap will hurt our roster building and Burn's money will hurt us moving forward.

I might be upset if I cared what you thought but I learned a long time ago to ignore criticism from someone you wouldn't take advice from.

You all act like it is your money. It isn't. And whatever we pay him will fit into the salary cap. Next year his cap hit will be low on a first year contract rising each year along with the salary cap. Samir has this and has been expecting all of it. Expect Burns to be signed in the next day or two.

Fitterer is going to get this done shortly and Burns will get around 26 million per year average. Hopefully it isn't all guaranteed and there is a base around what we want which is 23 and another possible 6 million in incentives for reaching certain levels. A win win. Meanwhile Burns wants it all guaranteed I am sure

Of course on paper we can make the contract whatever Burns wants as long as it isn't all guaranteed. If we can get some incentives in the contract why not give him what he wants if he puts up other worldly numbers like he thinks he can. If he puts up good numbers he gets a bunch but not all the incentives he could. If he drops offs, he get his base pay. Let him gamble on himself and if he puts up then pay the man. If not he is still getting paid commensurate with their production.

Talk to me in 3 weeks and we should know what we are up against. With all the changes it is hard to predict what will happen until we meet head to head.

You are missing the point in your haste to argue with everyone. I am not arguing whether our draft picks or released guys were great or sucked. My post pointed out you took your own opinion and claimed Fitterer said the same thing and he didn't. Maybe it is me but in this age where everyone makes stuff up and calls it the truth, I guess I am oversensitive to it when I see it.