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!

     

Are we willing to pay 35 million per year for Cam?


WarPanthers89

Recommended Posts

Simple question. I love Cam, and want him as our QB for his entire career as along as he is healthy, but will the team be willing to pay top dollar for his services? In a year or two the price may go up even more so it’s not unrealistic to think Cam will expect a contract similar to Wilson’s. imageproxy.php?img=&key=7e7e9fcd50b54ebe

F134F0B0-BA1B-43AF-BA5C-F27F57B4B8A9.jpeg

27B683CB-EB63-42D5-95FB-799A67CB29DF.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is worth a lot but that just seems crippling with where the cap is currently and if the trend continues, be in the future. The gap between QBs and the non QBs is widening at an alarming rate and in a league where competion is even in contracts that is alarming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A healthy Cam can command a lot, but Wilson is simply more accomplished. But I can see Cam getting in the 30 mil per year club if he displays decent arm strength in the coming season. Absolutely! If he can lead us to the Super Bowl while doing it, then 35 mil is certainly within reach, if not a certainty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, uncfan888 said:

Depends on how his shoulder responds this year. I hope the answer is yes. I wouldn't have paid that much for Russell though

They have no choice the defense isn't the same 

Wilson is the best player on the team

They couldve traded him and draft a Qb but then they would be hoping he turns out to be Wilson or better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't look at it in terms of dollars.  I look at it in terms of percent of the total cap.  A franchise QB can take up 10-15% of your cap without crippling you.  Getting above that, and you quickly find yourself lacking the players to compete "somewhere" and other teams figure it out and expose you.

Now, this all assumes Cam is still a franchise QB after surgery.  If his arm is 2015 again, yea, he's good for 10-15%.  If not, then I think you start to look elsewhere if that's the money he's after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of pragmatic views in this thread that I did not anticipate...

If he's healthy, then yes. He hasn't been  healthy for 3 years now though, so I would not pay him that. He's still by far the best option at QB and best QB we've ever had, but his health is a major concern moving forward. 

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...