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!

     

Panthers make more roster moves


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bababoey said:

I have no idea who that is.  Wait until Monday.  Luke will probably be a June 1st cut and that will clear an extra 7 million.  Currently he is still on the roster.

Has Luke retired officially or not...meaning submitted the paperwork and is legit retired?  I thought retired players hit the dead cap when their retirement is official.   Spotrac has him retired with his huge dead cap hit and his small cap savings (~$3M) but OTC has him active and not getting the cap savings.  Which one is correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bababoey said:

I have no idea who that is.  Wait until Monday.  Luke will probably be a June 1st cut and that will clear an extra 7 million.  Currently he is still on the roster.

They wont cut him, he already retired.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Has Luke retired officially or not...meaning submitted the paperwork and is legit retired?  I thought retired players hit the dead cap when their retirement is official.   Spotrac has him retired with his huge dead cap hit and his small cap savings (~$3M) but OTC has him active and not getting the cap savings.  Which one is correct?

https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/pittsburgh-steelers-nfl-features-news-blog-long-form/2016/3/5/11158958/nfl-101-how-cuts-retirements-and-trades-affect-the-salary-cap

Teams can end a contract at any time, but so can players. In a player's case, though, the only way they can do this is by retiring. In the end, though, the math looks pretty much the same as if the player had been cut -- and the June 1 rule applies here, too.

For instance, if our player from the example above had retired instead of being cut, his money would account the same way as if he had been cut by the team. If he files his retirement paperwork on or after June 1, the money counts as if he was cut on or after June 1.

Just like anything else in the NFL, though, there is a "but" for this rule, too: if the player retires with time remaining on his contract, then chooses to come back into the league later, he is not a free agent. Contracts apply, in most cases, to accrued seasons, not calendar years. If the player doesn't play, he doesn't accrue a season. Therefore, his return to the field would put him back under the control of the same team, unless that team chooses to cut him. This rule is part of the reason why Barry Sanders chose to retire: the Lions refused to cut him, and he decided he'd rather stop playing altogether than play another season for Detroit. Conversely, Brett Favre retired, and then the team chose to cut him while he was retired. He was then able to return to the league later as a free agent.

Okay, there are actually two "buts" for retirements. When a player retires, the team has the option to pursue the return of a portion of the signing bonus equal to the unplayed portions of the contract, and that money is no longer counted against the salary cap. This is typically done through an arbitrator. This is known as the "Barry Sanders Rule" because this is exactly how the situation played out in his case, as he was required to pay back a portion of his bonus. The difference between now and then is there was no precedent when Sanders played; now, it's explicitly written into the CBA to allow for this arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/pittsburgh-steelers-nfl-features-news-blog-long-form/2016/3/5/11158958/nfl-101-how-cuts-retirements-and-trades-affect-the-salary-cap

Teams can end a contract at any time, but so can players. In a player's case, though, the only way they can do this is by retiring. In the end, though, the math looks pretty much the same as if the player had been cut -- and the June 1 rule applies here, too.

For instance, if our player from the example above had retired instead of being cut, his money would account the same way as if he had been cut by the team. If he files his retirement paperwork on or after June 1, the money counts as if he was cut on or after June 1.

Just like anything else in the NFL, though, there is a "but" for this rule, too: if the player retires with time remaining on his contract, then chooses to come back into the league later, he is not a free agent. Contracts apply, in most cases, to accrued seasons, not calendar years. If the player doesn't play, he doesn't accrue a season. Therefore, his return to the field would put him back under the control of the same team, unless that team chooses to cut him. This rule is part of the reason why Barry Sanders chose to retire: the Lions refused to cut him, and he decided he'd rather stop playing altogether than play another season for Detroit. Conversely, Brett Favre retired, and then the team chose to cut him while he was retired. He was then able to return to the league later as a free agent.

Okay, there are actually two "buts" for retirements. When a player retires, the team has the option to pursue the return of a portion of the signing bonus equal to the unplayed portions of the contract, and that money is no longer counted against the salary cap. This is typically done through an arbitrator. This is known as the "Barry Sanders Rule" because this is exactly how the situation played out in his case, as he was required to pay back a portion of his bonus. The difference between now and then is there was no precedent when Sanders played; now, it's explicitly written into the CBA to allow for this arbitration.

Got ya, but he's officially retired?  Players sometimes say they are retired and drag their feet on the paperwork and the retirement is not official until then.  If he's officially retired, Spotrac is correct and OTC is incorrect.  Typically it's the other way around with those two sites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/pittsburgh-steelers-nfl-features-news-blog-long-form/2016/3/5/11158958/nfl-101-how-cuts-retirements-and-trades-affect-the-salary-cap

Teams can end a contract at any time, but so can players. In a player's case, though, the only way they can do this is by retiring. In the end, though, the math looks pretty much the same as if the player had been cut -- and the June 1 rule applies here, too.

For instance, if our player from the example above had retired instead of being cut, his money would account the same way as if he had been cut by the team. If he files his retirement paperwork on or after June 1, the money counts as if he was cut on or after June 1.

Just like anything else in the NFL, though, there is a "but" for this rule, too: if the player retires with time remaining on his contract, then chooses to come back into the league later, he is not a free agent. Contracts apply, in most cases, to accrued seasons, not calendar years. If the player doesn't play, he doesn't accrue a season. Therefore, his return to the field would put him back under the control of the same team, unless that team chooses to cut him. This rule is part of the reason why Barry Sanders chose to retire: the Lions refused to cut him, and he decided he'd rather stop playing altogether than play another season for Detroit. Conversely, Brett Favre retired, and then the team chose to cut him while he was retired. He was then able to return to the league later as a free agent.

Okay, there are actually two "buts" for retirements. When a player retires, the team has the option to pursue the return of a portion of the signing bonus equal to the unplayed portions of the contract, and that money is no longer counted against the salary cap. This is typically done through an arbitrator. This is known as the "Barry Sanders Rule" because this is exactly how the situation played out in his case, as he was required to pay back a portion of his bonus. The difference between now and then is there was no precedent when Sanders played; now, it's explicitly written into the CBA to allow for this arbitration.

Guys, he comin' back 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I am gonna believe it wasn’t us if the 4th round pick price is accurate. We needed 225 points to get from 19 to their pick. 875 at 19 to 1100 at 14.  Our 2026 4th was valued at 56 points I think. A future 4th has less value. So that wasn’t close to enough.    It would have taken our third and our fourth. Comes within a point of even.    Now, moving to their spot in the second round we could have done but after Miami took Rodriguez why would we? 
    • Yep,and Blake Miller have had more experiences than Freeling,Lions did not sigh a vet T like Walker,so they had to pick Miller.
    • I mean it's expected.  This is the NBA.  And they hate the Charlotte Hornets.  Flagg was also the guy "magically" given to the Mavs who lost Luca to the wildly popular Lakers.  Was always an uphill battle.  But the award is BS since it's not voted on before play-in starts. Kon probably lost because of the play-in as many people switched votes.  It was a regular season award, so this is some nonsense.  Kon also didn't have the luxury of taking 10 games off to rest up injuries like Flagg did.  If he did, he wouldn't have been nursing his back the last month.  I mean, screw him for being on an actual playoff team that matters.  Flagg took tons of shots a game, he was wildly inefficient.  Kon was a huge reason the Hornets made the play-in and turned the season around after Jan.   I think Flagg will probably be the better player long term, or at least the most impact.  But Kon should have won ROTY.
×
×
  • Create New...