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!

     

Ha Ha, Flowers...


top dawg

Recommended Posts

No this isn't a laugh about flowers, it's about realistic free agent targets to help our defense. 

In my opinion, our number one target in free agency should be Ha Ha Clinton-Dix. We need a young, experienced safety either with or without Eric Reid, and Ha Ha should be affordable and provide good production for years to come. 

Trey Flowers isn't the top Edge as far as sacks go, but he gets good marks for his proficiency. He consistently gets pressure and would make a nice addition to Addison on the other side.

Short, Poe, Addison and Flowers should be enough for a decent O-line.

Jackson, Bradberry, Reid, and Clinton-Dix should provide enough playmakers for a good defensive backfield.

With the working material of Obada or Cox, Haynes, Gaulden and LB Carter, we may have the seeds for a pretty good defense if we can land these two younger vets.

If nothing else, it would allow us to feel better about going into the draft, and possibly open up some options. Both should be affordable and may provide some value given their bodies of work thus far because they can get better (in arguably better situations).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t say Clinton- Dix is  young, he just turned 27 but he’s in his prime at 27. I would be happy if we signed him. Likewise Flowers. 

  Regardless of that we still need to get younger, especially the DE rotation. I wouldn’t object to drafting a safety either but Gaulden’s presence may preclude that chance.

 I was looking at RD 2-3 DEs that could be possibilities. I like Joe Jackson, I’m not keen on Anthony Nelson and I would be ok with Ximines from round 3. Gotta keep trying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Seoul_Panther said:

I wouldn’t say Clinton- Dix is  young, he just turned 27 but he’s in his prime at 27. I would be happy if we signed him. Likewise Flowers. 

  Regardless of that we still need to get younger, especially the DE rotation. I wouldn’t object to drafting a safety either but Gaulden’s presence may preclude that chance.

 I was looking at RD 2-3 DEs that could be possibilities. I like Joe Jackson, I’m not keen on Anthony Nelson and I would be ok with Ximines from round 3. Gotta keep trying.

27 is straight up cradle robbing compared to what we typically field at safety. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Seoul_Panther said:

I wouldn’t say Clinton- Dix is  young, he just turned 27 but he’s in his prime at 27. I would be happy if we signed him. Likewise Flowers. 

  Regardless of that we still need to get younger, especially the DE rotation. I wouldn’t object to drafting a safety either but Gaulden’s presence may preclude that chance.

 I was looking at RD 2-3 DEs that could be possibilities. I like Joe Jackson, I’m not keen on Anthony Nelson and I would be ok with Ximines from round 3. Gotta keep trying.

According to Google (and several sites), Ha Ha just turned 26 on December 21st. Flowers will be 26 in August. They are both arguably just entering their prime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I very seriously doubt that we'll invest any significant resources into the safety positions with Rivera returning. Those positions just don't matter to Ron. 

I do think we'll sign a decent FA DE though.

Ron isn't running the show. You watch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, top dawg said:

According to Google (and several sites), Ha Ha just turned 26 on December 21st. Flowers will be 26 in August. They are both arguably just entering their prime.

Yup, you’re right. Another question then. Who would be your ideal (realistic) starting duo at safety for the Panthers next season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Remind me of when in Hurney's history we've made significant investments in the safety positions.

It's a new day, with a new owner, with jobs on the line.

Eric Reid is a start. Minter wasn't the worst safety.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seoul_Panther said:

Yup, you’re right. Another question then. Who would be your ideal (realistic) starting duo at safety for the Panthers next season?

Probably want to ask that question, at least in regards to being realistic, in a couple of months, but Reid at SS and Clinton-Dix at FS is within the realm of reality depending upon what transpires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, top dawg said:

It's a new day, with a new owner, with jobs on the line.

Eric Reid is a start. Minter wasn't the worst safety.

 

If Tepper wanted a significant departure from the norms of Hurney and Rivera then they would've been replaced. If his idea of change is to try to force known commodities into changing how they do their jobs then we're fuged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...