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!

     

Most critical 4 game stretch ever?!?!?


Bronn

Recommended Posts

So, do you all think our next four games are the most critical series we have ever had, not including end-of-season or post-season?

If we can come out of this with at least two wins, I think we are still in very good shape in the NFC.

Ideally, we'll come out at 4-0, but GB, SEA, NO, and PHI could ultimately shape the tone of the rest of the season for us.

Beat GB, SEA, and PHI, and it is ultimately another L against each of them once the end of the season positioning race begins.

GB has looked average at times, and has trouble with teams built like ours.

SEA has looked very bipolar this year. I don't think Dallas is as good as they are playing, and I never thought they would beat Seattle at Seattle.

 

PHI is playing rather well for their talent level, and honestly worries me the most.

 

NO is our only real competition for the NFCS... Even that might be giving them too much credit, though... but a W is a W when it comes to your division...

 

Cleveland could be a trap game... Minnesota doesn't scare me... Not scared at all of the Bucs or the Falcons...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, do you all think our next four games are the most critical series we have ever had, not including end-of-season or post-season?

If we can come out of this with at least two wins, I think we are still in very good shape in the NFC.

Ideally, we'll come out at 4-0, but GB, SEA, NO, and PHI could ultimately shape the tone of the rest of the season for us.

Beat GB, SEA, and PHI, and it is ultimately another L against each of them once the end of the season positioning race begins.

GB has looked average at times, and has trouble with teams built like ours.

SEA has looked very bipolar this year. I don't think Dallas is as good as they are playing, and I never thought they would beat Seattle at Seattle.

 

PHI is playing rather well for their talent level, and honestly worries me the most.

 

NO is our only real competition for the NFCS... Even that might be giving them too much credit, though... but a W is a W when it comes to your division...

 

Cleveland could be a trap game... Minnesota doesn't scare me... Not scared at all of the Bucs or the Falcons...

 

Damn some of y'all can't read for poo.

 

On the Cleveland "trap" game... I figured we have a good shot at putting together a good little win streak going into that one, and thought we might overlook them based on their not-so-recent history...

That said, I'm still not that afraid of Brian Hoyer. The guy is having a great year so far, don't get me wrong, but he has good talent around him and hasn't really had THAT tough of a schedule tbqh. I think the Browns in general are riding a little high right now than they are in reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as bipolar as the NFL has been this season, no game is a given. Panthers will have to fight for 60 full minutes of every game they play. the upside to that is that if the Panthers do win the division/make the playoffs/have back-to-back winning records, it will be so much more sweet to enjoy. all that being said, we need to go 2-2 in the next four games, preferably winning the games against Green Bay and New Orleans. losing to Seattle and Philly wouldnt hurt us as much as losing a common game (GB) or a division game (NO). i think if we play to our talent level and get alittle luck, we can win all four games. i do believe these next four will define the rest of our season. 0-4 will be nearly impossible to rebound from. 1-3 is one of the more likely outcomes but wont be a total disaster. 2-2 is another likely outcome and would set us up nicely (especially with a division win against the saints), anything above 2-2 would be absolutely outstanding for our season.

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...