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!

     

Willie McGinest Top 5 Defenses: Carolina number 1


nctarheel0619

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, CarolinaNCSU said:

We can still be Top 5-7, but that's all I'd be willing to go until the CBs (or DL) show it on the field. Good chance our DL isn't going to be able to take a single game off this year, and will need to be absolute monsters consistently to help out the rookies. 

Thats just it.......they are all monsters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, SCP said:

High praise from Willie. I think #1 is a stretch with our unproven back end but our front 7 is unreal.

Not a stretch at all when you look at the absolute cheese d*ck slate of QBs on tap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone else worried about our DE depth more than the CBs? With the zone scheme we play I think we can hide some of the deficiencies of our secondary considering we have Coleman coming back and all signs point to Boston being at least a sufficient starter at the other safety spot. With having 2 of the best coverage LBs in the league playing every down, I think we have enough talent to be alright ASSUMING we can get to the QB. Ealy definitely balled out during the Super Bowl but he has yet to prove it over the course of a season. And after Johnson and Ealy, we really don't have anyone that I would trust to come in and play full-time in the case of injuries.

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...