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!

     

Panthers Inactives


nctarheel0619

Recommended Posts

Those of you who want to see us give the ball to unknown rookies when we have a perfectly healthy running back playing at a pro bowl level is crazy.  Yes, I'd like to see what the young kids could do.  But I'd also rather have our best 53 on the field.  Stew is fine and shows no signs of needing rest.  Keeping feeding the man the rock. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Smithers said:

Those of you who want to see us give the ball to unknown rookies when we have a perfectly healthy running back playing at a pro bowl level is crazy.  Yes, I'd like to see what the young kids could do.  But I'd also rather have our best 53 on the field.  Stew is fine and shows no signs of needing rest.  Keeping feeding the man the rock. 

Horton and Simonson are so vital to our success over giving our Pro Bowl RB some rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, KillerKat said:

CAP should be active. We better hope Stew doesn't wear down come playoff time. I'd activate him over somone like Horton or Simonson. Btw, it's kinda weird we decided to go with Horton over Delaire. Horton really doesn't do much and was cut earlier this year. Go figure.

Horton is not playing, he's suspended for failing a PED test.  4 week suspension.  Forget when he can be activated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, KillerKat said:

CAP should be active. We better hope Stew doesn't wear down come playoff time. I'd activate him over somone like Horton or Simonson. Btw, it's kinda weird we decided to go with Horton over Delaire. Horton really doesn't do much and was cut earlier this year. Go figure.

Ignore me, forgot Horton was suspended. 

I would like to see Cap active over Fozzy but who would catch kicks and immediately take a knee then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KillerKat said:

Horton and Simonson are so vital to our success over giving our Pro Bowl RB some rest.

you do know that we have 3 running backs active, right?  Horton and Simonson being active have nothing to do with CAP being inactive.  We aren't going to go into any game with 4 or 5 active running backs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all of us supporting CAP's being activated want him to replace Stew.  But if we get a big lead on Atlanta, there would be nothing wrong with giving him snaps late in the game.  But you can't give him snaps if he's not active.

I understand Simonson being active.  We're very thin at TE.  Getting him up to speed is important in case Dickson or (God forbid) Olsen goes out.

We're LESS thin at RB.  Tolbert or Fozzy could fill in...

Hopefully though we can lock up home field soon and then get CAP active to give him game experience

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...