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!

     

The Panthers absolutely need to give Jake Long an offer

Matthias

By Matthias,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Matthias Proficient

Matthias

Posted
Posted

We cannot go into the draft with two huge question marks at both WR and OT.  Now my guy, Bulaga, was taken off the market before the games begun.  Nothing we could have done about that.  Even went back to GB for less money.  When we look at the receiver department, there really is no one we like out there.  The biggest receiver name that will come available perhaps later today in Dwayne Bowe, is not a burner.  Plus for the past couple of seasons he has stunk up the joint.

 

 

So I'm telling you guys right now, we cannot enter this draft with KB still be our only receiver on the roster, and flipping Mr. Blindside himself as our starting LT.  We need to put in a call to Long's agent, and bring his butt here.  Now I know the guy is a little injury prone these last couple of seasons, but he is the only LT out there that will add something to our O-line.  I was willing to pay Bulaga in the 7-8 million a year range, and I have no problem offering that to Long.  As long as he could stay healthy, he would be the best LT we've had since Gross of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rodeo Veteran

rodeo

Posted
Posted

You want to solve the question marks at tackle by signing a guy who can't stay healthy and is thinking of retiring?

 

Every player in the NFL has question marks, honestly. It's very rare that you're like "Ah, finally, the perfect player."

 

I know most people will bring up Luke but I happen to know he enjoys the type of porn with men "drowning" anime figurines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

You want to solve the question marks at tackle by signing a guy who can't stay healthy and is thinking of retiring?

 

I'd have no problem with taking a look at him but thinking he comes without plenty of issues of his own is ignoring reality.

 

The only way we land a 29 year old former All-Pro LT is if he comes with some issues.  I would imagine any contract we'd extend to him would feature minimal guaranteed money and likely heavily laden with incentives.  That's why I say it's low risk, potential high reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

Every player in the NFL has question marks, honestly. It's very rare that you're like "Ah, finally, the perfect player."

 

I know most people will bring up Luke but I happen to know he enjoys the type of porn with men "drowning" anime figurines.

 

Said above, I'd have no problem with looking at him, but you have to be real about it.

 

He's failed to finish the last four seasons and had two straight ACL tears.  That's not an easy thing for a man that size to recover from.

 

You sign him, you'd also better be ready to sign someone else in case he goes down (which given his history is pretty likely).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stirs Grand Master

stirs

Posted
Posted

Okay, here's the deal.

 

Yes, Gman can act like a schoolgirl who has no date to the prom and look desperate, or, since the whole league knows we have OT needs, he can wait on the agent for Long to contact him, since we are the most logical place for his client.

 

This gives us a bit more leverage

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rodeo Veteran

rodeo

Posted
Posted

Said above, I'd have no problem with looking at him, but you have to be real about it.

 

He's failed to finish the last four seasons and had two straight ACL tears.  That's not an easy thing for a man that size to recover from.

 

You sign him, you'd also better be ready to sign someone else in case he goes down (which given his history is pretty likely).

 

 

Well we did sign his back-up in Oher, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

The only way we land a 29 year old former All-Pro LT is if he comes with some issues.  I would imagine any contract we'd extend to him would feature minimal guaranteed money and likely heavily laden with incentives.  That's why I say it's low risk, potential high reward.

 

See above.

 

I wouldn't call it "low risk" with the number of times he's been hurt.

 

Like I said, if you go this route, better be sure you have a backup plan.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...