Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

long term deal for hardy was never in the plans


Recommended Posts

I don't understand why we franchised him if we didn't plan to sign him long term or try to trade him. Everyone points to the RB contracts and Beason as limiting our cap mobility, but that Hardy tag is HUGE this year. We may just be setting ourselves up to get Julius'd again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why we franchised him if we didn't plan to sign him long term or try to trade him. Everyone points to the RB contracts and Beason as limiting our cap mobility, but that Hardy tag is HUGE this year. We may just be setting ourselves up to get Julius'd again.

 

I am sure the Boston Boss has a plan.  No worries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why we franchised him if we didn't plan to sign him long term or try to trade him. Everyone points to the RB contracts and Beason as limiting our cap mobility, but that Hardy tag is HUGE this year. We may just be setting ourselves up to get Julius'd again.

the entire secondary is being overhauled. keep the line as is even if it is at a premium to minimize the damage to one of the best defenses in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why we franchised him if we didn't plan to sign him long term or try to trade him. Everyone points to the RB contracts and Beason as limiting our cap mobility, but that Hardy tag is HUGE this year. We may just be setting ourselves up to get Julius'd again.

 

Consider it a one year rental while they train a replacement.  They were stoked to get Kony Ealy.  We've seen the negative effects of what big long term deals can do to a team if they don't pan out.  Hardy is still pretty young and has a handful of good seasons ahead of him if he stays out of trouble, but is it worth the risk/price?  NFL teams are pretty fluid...you have to have guys waiting in the wings at all positions to stay competitive.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the entire secondary is being overhauled. keep the line as is even if it is at a premium to minimize the damage to one of the best defenses in the league.

 

Might have been able to improve that secondary quite a bit with that $13M though.  Or how about the OL?  Or the WR corps?

 

I just don't see the end game of franchising Hardy if he's not in the long-term plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might have been able to improve that secondary quite a bit with that $13M though.  Or how about the OL?  Or the WR corps?

 

I just don't see the end game of franchising Hardy if he's not in the long-term plans.

continuity can be just as or even more effective than throwing money at outside big names to fix holes.

based on what the team is trying to do overall, it makes sense...even if we as fans don't agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

continuity can be just as or even more effective than throwing money at outside big names to fix holes.

based on what the team is trying to do overall, it makes sense...even if we as fans don't agree with it.

 

If we have another winning season and playoff berth, then I'll say it was worth it.  If history repeats itself and we fail to have our first consecutive winning seasons, then I'll still be saying that Hardy tag was a big reason as to why.  I was onboard with the Hardy signing when I thought it was just buying us time to negotiate a long-term deal.  Then again, maybe that was our plan and that got changed by Hardy's little stunt.  It's easy to say that had no impact, but we can't know that for sure.  We certainly were trying to negotiate long-term prior to tagging him, so I'm not buying this report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, the franchise tag keeps him hungry for a big payday next season, and gives him incentive to play hard. Let some other team throw big money at him next season and watch him implode after it goes to his head. ( I. e. the raiders)

You don't give big long term contracts to guys like hardy, it's simply not worth the risk in a conservative business.

Still going to love watching him put up big sack numbers this season though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I hope you understand that this Anti Bryce thing as you call it is really a pro Panthers thing. I think I can safely use we. We want the best for the Panthers.  As far as this other post saying ‘Anti’ Bryce people do misinformation.. you mean like going all in on “Renfro should have caught” that poorly thrown ball? I guess it was week 1. And calling it a drop. Comical btw.  I wonder, did you call that out or let it slide because it aligned with your agenda? 
    • These are great posts with the comparisons and the numbers.   I haven’t lookyat Smity’s numbers since probably the first time he was on the ballot.  But if you watched every week you know what he is. Whatever his yardage or targets numbers were.  He was fuging dominant. I have watched since the AFL days and seen who there is to see. There are many great WRs over the years. GREAT WRs. Smitty is up there in the game of football. 
    • Smith is clear cut HOF if you judge what he did by reception. Fitzgerald was a stat padder.    The most Steve Smith was ever targeted in his career was in 2005 (150 targets). The same year he wins the triple crown.    Larry Fitzgerald was targeted more than 150 times over 9 separate seasons. Not once eclipsing 1500 yards in a season.    The over glazing of Larry Fitzgerald going around is way over blown. ARZ was top 10 in passing attempts nearly his entire prime. Steve Smith and Andre Johnson had it far worse and would have surpassed his #s in the same situation.
×
×
  • Create New...