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 might be headed to LA for playoffs


TheSpecialJuan

Recommended Posts

newton_david.png&w=160&h=160&scale=crop

David Newton ESPN Staff Writer 

With the Rams giving a lot of key players Sunday off against San Francisco the Panthers could end up going to Los Angeles for a first-round game if the 49ers win and Carolina remains the No. 5 seed. If the Saints win and the Rams win then Carolina is in line to play at New Orleans in the first round.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First-year Rams head coach Sean McVay is making his first decision about whether to rest players ahead of the playoffs and he hinted that he’d land on the side of sitting key starters with the Rams unable to move into one of the top two seeds with a victory.

Running back Todd Gurley won’t get a chance to add a final polish to his MVP case as the Rams will go with Malcolm Brown, Justin Davis and Lance Dunbar at running back. Whoever is running the ball will be taking handoffs from Sean Mannion as he’ll be quarterbacking in place of Jared Goff. Goff will dress as the backup.

Defensive tackle Aaron Donald, left tackle Andrew Whitworth and center John Sullivan will also be inactive. Wide receiver Cooper Kupp and linebacker Mark Barron are both dealing with injuries and could help round out that inactive list against the 49ers.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know nobody else on here wants it but my dream scenario is play New Orleans in New Orleans and beating them in the playoffs in front of their home crowd. I know we have looked like poo against them but it would be nice to go there and beat them in the playoffs. They are beatable

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...