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!

     

Opinions: could they afford a 19 million cap hit?


Jmac

Recommended Posts

Gonna throw this out there. Could they realistically  afford the 19 million to resign a QB with the needs that this team has? Between the vets they have to resign, the obvious needs on both lines (with other needs), and CMC to try and lock in....it was never feasible. 

I feel that Tepper is not considering doing the deal (or really ever was.) Cam wasn't his guy and he has no reason to have allegiance to him.

What is your opinion.....was it just a pipe dream that this would all work out and was never realistic financially ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering how much old money we have on the roster, I hate to say Cam might be gone.  But I'm also in the camp to not give up on him completely.  I'm a believer.  We will have a lot of work to do going into the off season to retain our best players and to fill in our gaps and holes on the roster, especially if there's a coaching change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, d-dave said:

Considering how much old money we have on the roster, I hate to say Cam might be gone.  But I'm also in the camp to not give up on him completely.  I'm a believer.  We will have a lot of work to do going into the off season to retain our best players and to fill in our gaps and holes on the roster, especially if there's a coaching change.

Bingo. But I feel more and more there are a number of huge contracts coming up, plus retirements. Rebuilding may be inc. Cam doesn’t want to stay around for a rebuild either. He may have to sign a 1 year extension if he wants to stay. I don’t see him doing that either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is the last year of his contract, not a 1 year deal. 19 million is the cap savings, not the cap hit.

 

If they gave him an extension, the 19 million could be reduced by as much as they want. 19 million is only in play if they agree for him to just play out the contract as it is. But the actual cap hit is 21 million or so. If they gave him an extension, the 21 million could be reduced by as much as they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the timing of his contract and his injury situation just happened to align themselves in such a manner it makes the decision much easier for the Panthers from a business perspective. A couple years ago people were asking how much Cam's body would take as much as we was running the ball. Not unlike a RB who starts hitting the 30-year old mark, Cam's injuries are not unlike those of a RB who's taken his share of hits over the years. Look at it this way-

If Cam were healthy- no problem.

If he was not healthy and in the middle of his contract- no problem.

He's not healthy and he's at the end of his deal- that's a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Anybodyhome said:

That's the rub- he's not MVP level. Hasn't been for a couple years now.

Il agree there, but that’s due to injuries, which we all know he has been fighting for years now. With all this time to heal (being on IR) what if he comes back healthy? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Lobo said:

Il agree there, but that’s due to injuries, which we all know he has been fighting for years now. With all this time to heal (being on IR) what if he comes back healthy? 

As I said earlier, if this injury occurred in the middle of his contract, I don't see a problem bringing him back. But the fact his injury and the end of his contract are aligning make a difficult decision a little easier to swallow. Not to mention I've been saying for a couple years that we have already seen the best of Cam and I don't think those days are anything but fond memories.

Let me ask you this: if Cam ended up in New Orleans or Atlanta, would you lose sleep over having to face him twice a year? Five years ago maybe. Not now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, sharkkiller said:

this is the last year of his contract, not a 1 year deal. 19 million is the cap savings, not the cap hit.

If they gave him an extension, the 19 million could be reduced by as much as they want. 19 million is only in play if they agree for him to just play out the contract as it is. But the actual cap hit is 21 million or so. If they gave him an extension, the 21 million could be reduced by as much as they want.

Would you seriously offer to extend an over 30 quarterback who basically hasn't been able to stay healthy for the better part of two years?

If you saw some other team do that, what would you say?

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...