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!

     

A new season from "Fans 4 The logo"........


AKPantherFan

Recommended Posts

An e-mail sent to the Panthers and the media to seek their intentions on the new season concerning the Logo's on the field.

To whom it may concern,

My name is Joseph Cooper and I organized the “Fans for the Logo drive” last offseason. We are very thankful to the organization for listening to the fans and putting the Panthers logo’s on the field for the first time in Panthers history!

I am writing to ask about the intentions of the following season, and if the logo’s will make it back on the field this year? The fans showed great support in this effort, and were more than pleased from the outcome!

The only suggestion that we have for this season (from feedback received during last season) is that the “away” logo face the Panther fans on that side of the stadium. (last season they both faced the home side) The fans were very excited to see the Logo’ on the field, but they were disappointed that the “away” Logo was not facing them. I understand that the placement might have been decided because of the “TV view”, however this is just another way to show fan support and make the game day experience even better!!!

Please let me know of your intentions for the Logo’s this season so we can alert the fans and continue the excitement!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

123656611255.jpg

Who complained about which way the logo's faced ?

I was thrilled with your results last season, one of your supporters even, but this seems a bit .. much...

It was a continuing complaint.

I will be THRILLED if the Logo's just make it back onto the field. But if they do make an effort to make the change then good for those fans.

I dont care either way, but the fans had an opinion and deserve the right to have it considered.

No love lost if the change doesnt happen. If it does, then many folks will smile a bit larger on gameday.

IMO- Its all about the fans. We foot the bill, lets enjoy what we pay for!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Before The Lock.

hahahahhahahahaha...

i guess i couldnt expect anything less from the huddle huh :D

Ahhh... even with the HUGE amount of BS this whole thing started last offseason, the Huddle gave a great amount of support!!!

That was the only thread I ever started that hit over 11k views. It was a bit crazy at times, but there was a result seen, and the fans did get their point across!

not bad for an all out internet campaign!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I had a problem with the grass on the field.

I mean, the shade it was last year was a bit too bright and made my corneas burn slightly when I saw them play on TV. Hopefully they use a different kind of sod or grass seed this year. I would personally recommend that blue poo that will grow grass on cinderblocks.

JMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a continuing complaint.

I will be THRILLED if the Logo's just make it back onto the field. But if they do make an effort to make the change then good for those fans.

I dont care either way, but the fans had an opinion and deserve the right to have it considered.

No love lost if the change doesnt happen. If it does, then many folks will smile a bit larger on gameday.

IMO- Its all about the fans. We foot the bill, lets enjoy what we pay for!

Humm

I always just thought it was going with the NFL logo.

*shrug*

They damn well better put those logo's back.

That's karma....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I had a problem with the grass on the field.

I mean, the shade it was last year was a bit too bright and made my corneas burn slightly when I saw them play on TV. Hopefully they use a different kind of sod or grass seed this year. I would personally recommend that blue poo that will grow grass on cinderblocks.

JMHO

Goes to start a "Fans 4 the blue grass fertilizer" thread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...