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!

     

Kyle Allens film study (it's not good)


KaseKlosed

Recommended Posts

The guy is what 23? We are extremely fortunate to have him. He has the talent and will get better with experience. I have said it a million times, we have a ton of talent on both sides of the ball, and I am glad Allen has lead the team while Cam has been recovering, but THIS YEAR we need Cam back and to have his foot healed so we can compete for a championship should we make the playoffs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WarPanthers89 said:

The guy is what 23? We are extremely fortunate to have him. He has the talent and will get better with experience. I have said it a million times, we have a ton of talent on both sides of the ball, and I am glad Allen has lead the team while Cam has been recovering, but THIS YEAR we need Cam back and to have his foot healed so we can compete for a championship should we make the playoffs. 

This is the best team talent wise we have EVER assembled. What a damn shame it would be if we weren’t able to see it through with a healthy Cam 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like this PanthersFilmGuy he is brutally honest and has no bias or agendas. If he would just take the time to review every play and break them down rather than a measly 6 plays he would make his points even stronger. How long has he been doing this? Two, maybe three weeks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Peppers90 NC said:

I really like this PanthersFilmGuy he is brutally honest and has no bias or agendas. If he would just take the time to review every play and break them down rather than a measly 6 plays he would make his points even stronger. How long has he been doing this? Two, maybe three weeks?

Sacca twitter alt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, t96 said:

It’s unfathomable that this fool still can’t admit that McC is an elite RB and not just a slot WR like he’s convinced is the case.

You must have missed my recent posts on CMC. I ate my crow. I need you to let it go as well. CMC just does not have the power Kamara or Barkley or Bell has. He is the best weapon we have. Thank you for your on going concern. Have a great day. 

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...