Rivera would like to see Cam signed long-term before 2015 season

[TheRumGone]

I made this statement several months back, but why would a GM and a head coach, on the eve of trying to sign their franchise QB, go out over and over and praise the QB to the press?

Why

[motocross_cat]

What if we dont sign him before the season and go off and win a superbowl?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Ahahahahahaha

[Mother Grabber]

I love the fat bastard but he has ZERO leverage with Cam. He can rub all the nickels he wants, Cam is going to get paid

he knows that, which is why he's rubbing his nickels together, so he can pay cam.

[Frizzy350]

I can't believe that people actually have the energy to worry about Cam Newton not being a Panther.

 

Have none of you noticed us penny pinching in FA for the last 3 years?

 

We are prepared to make him the highest paid player in NFL history if needed.

[SIGCHI222]

And those that only see in black and white continue to spew their dogma.  Back up people.  Cam wants something from Getts, Getts wants something from Cam but, that is just on the surface.  In fact, both parties want lots of things from each other and until a deal gets done or Cammy Cam walks this is all just conjecture.

 

That said, my guess is that Cam ain't going nowhere.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Carry on....

[tailg8or]

I swear half this board does not know what a Franchise Tag is.

 

Teams don't want a QB under a franchise tag for 2 reasons ...  1) you don't want a QB at the helm of your offense if he is disgruntled or doesn't want to be there (not saying that is the case for Cam)  2)  franchise tags for QBs are BIG $$ and a BIG cap hit for the current year.

 

There's no reason they can't get a deal done before the current contract expires ... unless there is a gap that neither side is willing to fill (ie. money).  Cam may want the whole bank and Gett is not willing.  If that's the case, it wouldn't make sense to tag him unless it is a tag & trade. 

[blackcat]

I think G-man would want to as well, and it's Cam's side that's wanting to wait it out. Which honestly makes the most sense for Cam. Why sign a new deal after an injury-riddled year, when you lost every WR who'd caught a pass from Cam before? He'll likely have a comeback year, do well, and further increase his value. I'd say I'm pretty confident both sides want Cam to stay in Carolina.

 

I agree with what you're saying, but I question Cam's reasoning.  He's our franchise QB, he's going to get paid like one regardless of whether he signs today or next year.  How much more $$ do you think he'd get by waiting till next year than if he signed one today?

 

 

[MHS831]

Want some good news?  We have 9 draft picks coming next month and we have 2 free agents deciding on offers.  Right now we could take the field and be better than we were in 2014 at OL and WR.  Look for an OT, WR and RB in the draft.  Upgrades to those positions will also result in an upgraded qb.  I think the offense finished ranked about #20.  I expect that alone is enough to put us in the top 12.  The defense should be top 5 and I expect special teams, the focus of free agency, to be MUCH better.

 

 

[t96]

I agree with what you're saying, but I question Cam's reasoning. He's our franchise QB, he's going to get paid like one regardless of whether he signs today or next year. How much more $$ do you think he'd get by waiting till next year than if he signed one today?

I think it's more Cam's agent's reasoning than his own. If he lights it up this year at an elite level and we make a deep playoff or even Super Bowl run then his price could easily go from $20M/year to $25M/year. A lot depends on Wilson and Luck though, as Cam's side wants to let them (or Wilson atleast) set the market. I don't get that, but we'll see what happens.

[Mr. Scot]

Teams don't want a QB under a franchise tag for 2 reasons ... 1) you don't want a QB at the helm of your offense if he is disgruntled or doesn't want to be there (not saying that is the case for Cam) 2) franchise tags for QBs are BIG $$ and a BIG cap hit for the current year.

There's no reason they can't get a deal done before the current contract expires ... unless there is a gap that neither side is willing to fill (ie. money). Cam may want the whole bank and Gett is not willing. If that's the case, it wouldn't make sense to tag him unless it is a tag & trade.

Accepting that premise, do you really believe either of those two reasons would serve as justification for just letting Newton walk?

[gettlemanjack]

the NBC Pro Football Talk article on it concludes:

"The Colts have already said they weren’t planning on doing a new deal for Andrew Luck this offseason, which means Newton and Russell Wilson could be playing chicken to see which quarterback blinks first."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/26/ron-rivera-not-worried-about-contract-distraction-for-cam-newton/

and like one of the comments said: "Cam is head and shoulders above the likes of Dalton and Tannenhill. I’d also rather have him than Kaepernick. They will have to pay him and I am sure they want the deal done before Wilson and Luck sign so Cam won’t use that as his baseline."

and like another comment said: "I’d pay the guy. He’s dragged subpar offenses ahead for years now, sometimes with arms and legs hanging off. If you don’t want him, we’ll trade you a Cutler for him."

[CRA]

Name a QB with a worse OL/WR combo than Cam last year....

You want improved QB play you need to look at the front office....not a QB that dealt with all that crap while hurt

[hepcat]

I swear half this board does not know what a Franchise Tag is.

 

If I'm Gettleman I want my franchise QB playing in a contract year.  Historically players have their best years in contract years.  After this season if he lights it up they can either sign him to a long-term deal, or tag him and work something out.  It also protects the Panthers in case Cam gets injured.  

[AceBoogie]

And the other half doesn't know what a holdout is.

If Cam truly wanted to sit out a year i'd bet a lot of money someone would still be willing to pay him the following season.

If Cam made it clear he'd rather sit out than play under the tag, I'm sure Gettleman rather trade him than use up a large junk of cap space on nothing... again.

Thank you! That's exactly what I've been preaching, tagging Cam if he's made it clear he wants to test the market is dumb. You're just going to end up buying him a couple houses and he's going to leave anyway.

For the record I said IF. And if he wants to sign and you're just working out the details of the deal then tag him. If he wants to be a free agent you have to trade him