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!

     

Just to piss the NFL off


TPanther920

Recommended Posts

Just now, Moo Daeng said:

Why would he want to piss off the organization that provided a 1000 % return on his investment?

actually the consumers provided the reason for the return. Because of the apparent behind the scenes pressure the NFL has exerted on behalf of another bidder. Maybe because JR fought battles on behalf of the NFL and then the NFL forced him into selling when no one, any where, has PROVEN he is guilty of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cardiackat88. said:

Surprise investors:

1) Trump buys the team and gives it to Kim Jong Un as a peace offering.

2) Elon Musk buys the team and has the team play on Mars.

3) Vince McMahon buys the team and moves them to the new XFL.

 

I'd like option  3. We'd win a championship provided the players have to play out their contracts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People  outside of this fanbase most likely dont care and hardly know this is going on anyway. In trying to make small talk with colleagues from other parts of the country they didn't know the team was for sale or who the current owner is.  These are avid sports fans. Its huge to us and it gets some national  attention as it's the off-season but it doesn't sink in with non fans. They could announce it along with the first pick and we would be the only ones interested.

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...