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!

     

Josh's response to the AP


LUUUUUKE

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, mjligon said:

The ball is in Josh's court.

The ball has been in his court the entire time, until today. He could have signed on with the Panthers before and during any period of the negotiations. The ball is no longer in his court according to this franchise. A precedent was just set.

When was the last time you heard of a team rescinding a franchise offer? I can't remember. That's a very significant move, wouldn't you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were offering 12 million a year. I have no sympathy for him. Loved as a Panther but in one year he would make more money than any of us in a lifetime. In 4 years he would be able to retire at 33, have millions in the bank, probably won a SB and be set for life. No he wanted to play hardball. If you want QB money then be a QB. See ya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KendrickPanther said:

Anyone holding out hope of Josh coming back is delusional. Someone will pay him and he will have too much pride to take less to stay. Things obviously got so nasty the Panthers didn't even want him under the tag for a year.

I don't understand why people are assuming things got nasty.  There was nothing made public of any untoward actions by either party.  Does it not make entirely more sense that he's doing the same thing he did with CJ?  I mean the pattern has already been shown to us just a few weeks ago.  Gettleman takes a risk by letting player go.  Player tests the market, then either decides to come back at a rate Gettleman can live with or doesn't.  Doesn't have to be anything nasty about it at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a big supporter of Josh, but he have done what many other players have done, he forgot where he came from. Yes, he deserves more money, but not the type of money he is seeking. What I don't understand is his so called agent. His main goal is to make his client more profitable and known to generate more revenue. One way of doing this is to be on a winning team to generate a profitable market, which increases endorsements. Josh is on a high pedestal right now, but his agent isn't helping his market value by making his Client seem like a problem, and could cause him to be signed by a less attractive team, which could make Josh popularity diminish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And for the record, I'm not holding out hope he comes back.  I'm 95% sure he doesn't.  Some other team will almost certainly give him much more money than we can afford.  But it's not due to ill will or anything like that.  We just can't afford what some other teams can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

I don't understand why people are assuming things got nasty.  There was nothing made public of any untoward actions by either party.  Does it not make entirely more sense that he's doing the same thing he did with CJ?  I mean the pattern has already been shown to us just a few weeks ago.  Gettleman takes a risk by letting player go.  Player tests the market, then either decides to come back at a rate Gettleman can live with or doesn't.  Doesn't have to be anything nasty about it at all.

CJ is not comparable at all. Josh is coming off an All Pro season. His value on the open market will never be higher than it is right now. CJ is just looking to hold on for a few more seasons and chose familiarity over a few extra bucks. We could have kept him under the tag. We let him walk because threats were being made about missing camp and not going full speed. This is bigger than just bargaining tactics. You don't put all pros on the open market to lower their value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KendrickPanther said:

CJ is not comparable at all. Josh is coming off an All Pro season. His value on the open market will never be higher than it is right now. CJ is just looking to hold on for a few more seasons and chose familiarity over a few extra bucks. We could have kept him under the tag. We let him walk because threats were being made about missing camp and not going full speed. This is bigger than just bargaining tactics. You don't put all pros on the open market to lower their value.

What the did the season prior has no bearing on it.  If anything, that's why Josh got the franchise tag in the first place and CJ didn't.  There were no threats (just questions answered.  He did just go and work out with Cam, after all.  He wasn't threatening anything) and he certainly never said he wasn't gonna go full speed.  That's not even remotely within his character.  This also wasn't about lowering his value on Gettleman's part.  This was either A) just to put a legit number on his value since the negotiations had stalemated because the two sides differed in opinion on his value, or B) Gettleman really saw the negotiations as a lost cause and no sense in tying up $14mil of the cap if there's no chance of a long term deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Just chasing targets is a fools game. Chase averaged 85 yrds and .76 TDs per game his first year and 87.16 yrds, and .75 TD's per game his second year. Statistically the same. NOT an improvement. Puka saw no increase either. Yes, Waddle's went down because he had to share targets with another receiver - just like TMac will have to share targets with Coker next year so you have actually just made my point concerning Coker. Olave saw an increase in targets but Carr replaced Dalton and even with the increase in targets, his production was pretty flat (83 extra yards and 1 more TD for the entire year). And Wilson's number did increase but the Jets replaced the other two receivers and their contribution was significantly down from Davis's and Moore's. Again, nothing in those numbers should lead anyone to believe there will be a big leap for Tmac next year.       
    • See my previous post. You're also leaving out that T-Mac was likely hitting a rookie wall, like 95% of rookies do late in their first season, combined with the added attention on him by defenses, which in turn would be why Bryce looked Coker's way down the stretch.  With Coker playing like that to start next year, defenses will have to pay attention to it, which will then also make things easier for T-Mac. All of which is also ignoring that T-Mac will just be a better player next year than he was this year, assuming he works on his game this offseason, which we all know he will be.  If a player who was already your clear cut #1 comes back even better his next season, you're going to make sure you're throwing it his way more often, no matter who else you have. Again, Coker's added targets won't be at the expense of T-Mac's, they will BOTH be taking targets from the rest of the team.  Not to mention, we should be passing it more next year to begin with, seeing as we'll have both of them hopefully ready to go full speed Week 1, which again, will help both their target totals increase. Coker looks like a really good player, but even the most optimistic person can't say he looks like he has #1 potential, he has very solid to maybe even high end #2 potential.  You're not taking targets away from the reigning OROY who looks like a true Top 15 WR already to get your #2 targets, you increase both of them by taking from the others.
    • Need to crush the hawks tonight. A lose would really damage momentum 
×
×
  • Create New...