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!

     

Giants will let CB Prince Amukamara test free agency


beastson

Recommended Posts

In a radio interview, impending free agent CB Prince Amukamara said he does not expect to negotiate with the Giants before the start of free agency.
Amukamara was told in his exit interview the organization does not want to discuss a new contract until after free agency begins. Amukamara has proven an above-average corner on the field, but he has missed 13 games the past two seasons. The Giants would probably like him back, but they are going to let Amukamara set his market first. He is reportedly seeking $10 million annually. Feb 17 - 4:35 PM
 
10 million annually for a corner that can't stay healthy??? No thanks and good luck Prince
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BIg CB (6 feet, 207) with high character.  Would be a good fit here. Fairly sure he will make a few coins, however.   Has a bit of an injury history--weird injuries, not chronic knees etc.

The only way I see a signing like this is if we do not tag or sign Norman.  Norman will almost certainly be tagged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

BIg CB (6 feet, 207) with high character.  Would be a good fit here. Fairly sure he will make a few coins, however.   Has a bit of an injury history--weird injuries, not chronic knees etc.

The only way I see a signing like this is if we do not tag or sign Norman.  Norman will almost certainly be tagged.

Norman insurance. And if Norman does end up being here long term, even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's seeking $10 million a year, he's not going to sign with us for $5 million for a year.  He knows he's got some injury issues, and he wants someone to give him some cash to ensure he's financially set.

I mean, he's an above average corner, and at his age, someone is going to gamble on a big contract.  

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...