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!

     

On the road to Seattle


philit99

Recommended Posts

What are your thoughts and expectations for this weeks game? Vegas has Seattle -7. I however, think we finally beat the hawks, and it will be even better beating them in Seattle. I say Cam throws for 220 yards 2TD, rushes for 45 and 1TD. I say Carolina wins 27-21. I think the seahawks will take an early lead, and the Panthers come from behind late in the game. What say you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In no way am I calling this a must win game...But, they NEED to beat Seattle at some point, simply for the mental aspect and getting the monkey off their back IMO. 

 

Seattle has been the team we're chasing the last few years, blown games against, and continue to lose close ones to. Beat them, and I think the confidence boost alone will do wonders for the rest of the year and going forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In no way am I calling this a must win game...But, they NEED to beat Seattle at some point, simply for the mental aspect and getting the monkey off their back IMO. 

 

Seattle has been the team we're chasing the last few years, blown games against, and continue to lose close ones to. Beat them, and I think the confidence boost alone will do wonders for the rest of the year and going forward. 

You can also potentially knock them out the playoffs, and take a home win against them; which they count on to make the playoffs ever year (i.e.: if you win all your home games, and two on the road, you have 10 wins, and more likely make the playoffs).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm typically the eternal optimist, but I've been classically conditioned that when playing Seattle, I don't expect to win.  Add in the fact that the game is in their place, I don't feel great about it.  I'm convinced we have the personnel that can put together a winning effort, but I'm more concerned about the intangibles (long trip, crowd noise, pressure to finally win against them).

No matter the outcome, should be a low-scoring defensive struggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even with Seattle on the ropes, I think they're still a very good team and we're going to have to play sound football to win.  Have they taken a step backwards?  Yes, but I don't think anyone would argue any of the teams we've played this year are better than them.  I expect another close, hard fought game Sunday.

I think if we take care of the football and our offense puts points on the board in the 1st quarter, we'll be just fine on Sunday.

As an aside, I ventured over to their board this morning, and it looks a lot like ours did last year.  "Our QB sucks", "Which RB do we start next week", and "Wilson is shell shocked" type stuff all sounded familiar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...