Pundits "Stabbed in the back"

[panthers55]

8 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

I think there is almost no chance that Norman would have sat out this season. I don't know what he said or who he said it to, but it would be hard to imagine him foregoing $14M in one season, particularly since he had only made about $4M combined in his first 4 years in the league.

The problem was the tag was rescinded on April 20th fully 4 months before the season started so the idea that Gettleman had exhausted all options to get a deal done is comical.  Everyone knows deals get done at the last minute on most contracts not right away. 

[panthers55]

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

I don't get not renting him for a year...especially given we lost Peanut, Harper, and no one on the roster.   That 2015 secondary helped aid DL that had great talent at spots but wasn't well rounded. 

Given Newton is our QB and windows aren't big.  If he was content on "off year"....I don't get that 

I hope if Gettleman didn't realize his mistake this offseason he does now. Let's see if he keeps the D line intact or lets KK and Addison and Johnson go and replaces them with rookies and makes the same mistakes again.

[iamhubby1]

4 hours ago, CRA said:

No, I don't believe Norman was or should of signed a long term deal here.  I got no issue with a long term deal not working out that suited both parties.

my only issue is he botch of the tag and our 2016 season. 

 

Botched the tag? How? Are you of the mind that Gman had a responsibility to communicate with Josh? If so, why wasn't Josh more involved. If I wanted to stay with a team. I would sure be involved.

 

17 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Just one question then. If he had no intention of signing it then why when it was rescinded did he fire his agent and contact Gettleman to try and get it reinstated so he could sign it?  He clearly expected to be here and was only holding out because that was the only.leversge he had to get a long term deal done.

 

Maybe, just maybe Josh fired his agent because his agent didn't get a long term deal done. That is the one thing Josh wanted. A long term deal with the guaranteed money that comes with it.

 

Josh got almost 3 times more money in guarantees, than he would have on the tag. Plus, he didn't have to worry about an injury during the tag season ruining his long term deal.

 

Josh knew, hellz, we all knew he wasn't going to get 75mil from us. Why is that lost in all this?

 

Also, IMO, Gman used the tag specifically to get a long term deal done. When that deal looked as though it wasn't going to happen, Gman made the decision to move on. And that is the one decision most folks are up in arms about.

[Navy_football]

2 minutes ago, CRA said:

I don't get not renting him for a year...especially given we lost Peanut, Harper, and no one on the roster.   That 2015 secondary helped aid DL that had great talent at spots but wasn't well rounded. 

Given Newton is our QB and windows aren't big.  If he was content on "off year"....I don't get that 

I agree. I would have gone all out for a super bowl this season. But I get that Gettleman didn't want to pay $14M for a one year rental. 

What I really don't get is him not beefing up the pass rush, the OT position, vet secondary help, or anything really.

He replaced K. Love, and then brought K. Love back. 

[iamhubby1]

1 minute ago, panthers55 said:

I hope if Gettleman didn't realize his mistake this offseason he does now. Let's see if he keeps the D line intact or lets KK and Addison and Johnson go and replaces them with rookies and makes the same mistakes again.

 

"His mistake"? Because he made a decision you don't like. It is a mistake?

 

There is no historical proof that Gman will just let players walk. However, there is historical proof that he will offer what he feels are fair deals to keep players.

 

IMO, folks are hung up on the "What ifs" in this situation. They are refusing, for whatever reason, to label every decision Gman makes that they don't agree with as mistakes.

 

Losing has a way of doing that. The disappointment over this season has folks uneasy. I get it. I ain't all that happy myself. But I am also able to see that Gman, and by extension Rivera, took a calculated risk. If it had worked, and we had a more successful season. None of this negative discourse happens.

[Navy_football]

9 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

The problem was the tag was rescinded on April 20th fully 4 months before the season started so the idea that Gettleman had exhausted all options to get a deal done is comical.  Everyone knows deals get done at the last minute on most contracts not right away. 

Gettleman wasn't willing to pay Norman a big guaranteed deal. He had a number in his head and Josh's number was probably off substantially on the guaranteed amount. So, in Dave fashion, he just rescinded the tag because he didn't consider Josh a core player. 

And I'm not saying Josh was a core player, but you ain't replacing him with rookies and backups.

[panthers55]

4 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

Botched the tag? How? Are you of the mind that Gman had a responsibility to communicate with Josh? If so, why wasn't Josh more involved. If I wanted to stay with a team. I would sure be involved.

 

 

Maybe, just maybe Josh fired his agent because his agent didn't get a long term deal done. That is the one thing Josh wanted. A long term deal with the guaranteed money that comes with it.

 

Josh got almost 3 times more money in guarantees, than he would have on the tag. Plus, he didn't have to worry about an injury during the tag season ruining his long term deal.

 

Josh knew, hellz, we all knew he wasn't going to get 75mil from us. Why is that lost in all this?

 

Also, IMO, Gman used the tag specifically to get a long term deal done. When that deal looked as though it wasn't going to happen, Gman made the decision to move on. And that is the one decision most folks are up in arms about.

I love all the speculation you throw out as fact.  So do I think that in a negotiation with agent and player you should communicate with the player? I would but I don't know if it required. If I thought the agent was a fool and I wanted the player signed would I appeal to the player unless told specifically by the player to only talk with the agent. I would. Would I communicate directly with the player if I were making the largely unprecedented move of rescinding the tag. I would but apparently Gettleman doesnt do that. 

And again how many of these deals get done in April versus July or even August. Let's be real here, we were not up against any deadline and most all players don't sign there tag right away.

[iamhubby1]

6 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

I agree. I would have gone all out for a super bowl this season. But I get that Gettleman didn't want to pay $14M for a one year rental. 

What I really don't get is him not beefing up the pass rush, the OT position, vet secondary help, or anything really.

He replaced K. Love, and then brought K. Love back. 

 

Here's how I look at it. When the season ended, and he and Ron sat down and evaluated the team. They saw a team coming off a SB, with 20 starters coming back. Why shouldn't they think this year would be successful?

 

Even with the hang over from a SuperB owl loss. Most fans thought we were going to be competitive this year. Funny how things work out eh?

[panthers55]

14 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

"His mistake"? Because he made a decision you don't like. It is a mistake?

 

There is no historical proof that Gman will just let players walk. However, there is historical proof that he will offer what he feels are fair deals to keep players.

 

IMO, folks are hung up on the "What ifs" in this situation. They are refusing, for whatever reason, to label every decision Gman makes that they don't agree with as mistakes.

 

Losing has a way of doing that. The disappointment over this season has folks uneasy. I get it. I ain't all that happy myself. But I am also able to see that Gman, and by extension Rivera, took a calculated risk. If it had worked, and we had a more successful season. None of this negative discourse happens.

The whole historical proof argument you are making up. And really I gave him a pass to not sign key folks due to cap issues. Until this year when he had the money and didn't use it.

And I think I have been clear that the mistakes were not signing vets to replace these guys and counting on backups and rookies to fill the gap. That wasn't a calculated risk, that was blatant stupidity.

The whole this wasn't a mistake is refuted by having a bottom five secondary after having one of the best last year. It may be even unprecedented in the NFL to have that big a drop off without major injuries in the secondary.

[panthers55]

11 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Gettleman wasn't willing to pay Norman a big guaranteed deal. He had a number in his head and Josh's number was probably off substantially on the guaranteed amount. So, in Dave fashion, he just rescinded the tag because he didn't consider Josh a core player. 

And I'm not saying Josh was a core player, but you ain't replacing him with rookies and backups.

That is the thing. Fine don't sign Norman if you don't want to but don't compound the problem with rookies and Jags 

[panthers55]

17 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

 

Even with the hang over from a SuperB owl loss. Most fans thought we were going to be competitive this year. Funny how things work out eh?

Apparently you weren't reading my.posts. I predicted big problems on the secondary and a bunch of early struggling.  I did predict 10-6 thinking the offense would save us early but even I didn't realize how bad we would be on defense. I blame the reports from training camp talking about how good the rookies were doing. That was either extreme optimism or proof our receivers aren't very good so the rookies looked better than they did when the games actually started.

If I, a mere fan saw it, don't tell me Gettleman and Rivera didn't.

[iamhubby1]

15 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

I love all the speculation you throw out as fact.  So do I think that in a negotiation with agent and player you should communicate with the player? I would but I don't know if it required. If I thought the agent was a fool and I wanted the player signed would I appeal to the player unless told specifically by the player to only talk with the agent. I would. Would I communicate directly with the player if I were making the largely unprecedented move of rescinding the tag. I would but apparently Gettleman doesnt do that. 

And again how many of these deals get done in April versus July or even August. Let's be real here, we were not up against any deadline and most all players don't sign there tag right away.

 

Whoa there, just slow down a tad okay. I used words like "IMO", and "Maybe". Maybe you should not let your biases get in the way of your reading comprehension.

 

If, as you say, Gman should have been in contact with Josh. Then why is it alright for Josh to not be in contact with Gman? If that was my money, and I wanted to stay with that team. I sure as shootin' would be up in everyones' bidness making sure I knew exactly what was going on.

 

I have no idea why Gman withdrew the tag. But, IMO, Gman used the tag for the purpose of getting a long term deal done, without Josh hitting the open market. But once he did rescind the tag, IMO, he wanted to use the money to sign KK. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on how you view KK's season, that didn't work either.

 

Again. These are not facts. These are my thoughts.

 

 

 

 

[panthers55]

19 minutes ago, iamhubby1 said:

 

Whoa there, just slow down a tad okay. I used words like "IMO", and "Maybe". Maybe you should not let your biases get in the way of your reading comprehension.

 

If, as you say, Gman should have been in contact with Josh. Then why is it alright for Josh to not be in contact with Gman? If that was my money, and I wanted to stay with that team. I sure as shootin' would be up in everyones' bidness making sure I knew exactly what was going on.

 

I have no idea why Gman withdrew the tag. But, IMO, Gman used the tag for the purpose of getting a long term deal done, without Josh hitting the open market. But once he did rescind the tag, IMO, he wanted to use the money to sign KK. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on how you view KK's season, that didn't work either.

 

Again. These are not facts. These are my thoughts.

 

 

 

 

So was Josh in communication with Gman? We don't know. Was Josh informed about rescinding the tag? Apparently not by his account. Was the agent informed about rescinding the tag, I haven't heard, have you? Smitty heard about his release on the radio. Did Gettleman threaten to rescind it before hand and the agent or Josh tried to call his bluff and Gettleman followed through in the media to show he wasn't kidding?  Or did he and Rivera just say screw it and move on without using the threat of rescinding the tag as a bargaining chip.

Was Gettleman serious about negotiating long term about signing KK. Hard to say since it didn't happen. I think he brought in Butler as KK's replacement and wasn't going to make a credible offer until he saw how Butler did. Whether he tries more seriously this offseason may depend on what he learned from the Norman debacle, how Butler finishes out the year and what value he places on a hogmolly that he says he values and says he hates developing players for other teams.

Truth is I can forgive Dave all these issues as he is learning and growing. I just hope that unlike many posters here he can admit his faults and mistakes and learn and apply the newfound knowlege to avoid making the same mistakes again.  

[Anybodyhome]

19 hours ago, CatMan72 said:

He was tendered on March 1st and it was rescinded on April 20th, not sure how long it takes him to write his name but that seems like enough time. 

If he's saying the tender was some sort of sham and he was never given access to the paperwork he should take that up with the NFLPA. 

 

17 hours ago, Sasquatch said:

Tag was applied 3/1, rescinded 4/20. Absolutely no time in that 7 weeks for him to get his sig on the tendered contract and initiate discussion on a longer term deal. Yep, he did everything he could to remain a Panther.

The minute he signs the tag, he gives up his entire bargaining position because the team doesn't have to negotiate squat until the end of the following season.