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!

     

Teddy Bridgewater likely on the outs in Carolina


Verge
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, SizzleBuzz said:

Gotcha.

Let's approach it another way, do you believe it's in the best interests of the Panthers to pay out Teddy's contract in-full and also cut him thereby getting absolutely nothing in return?

Is that a sensible path?

 

Majority of the salary is now a sunk cost (to what degree is variable across a spectrum), so the decision comes down to what the team values for that sunk cost. If they place higher value on the roster spot/flexibility in having other players potentially see the field/etc then that's what they're buying with the cost associated with the decision to cut/trade. If they place higher value on having Teddy on the roster for X/Y/Z reason(s) then that's what they're buying with the sunk cost of the decision to retain.

My opinion is that while neither is optimal the team is better off in the former scenario, but there is a long time to go between now and the season. Teddy's presence itself is binary amongst the spectrum of possible financial outcomes. At this point the team seems fine with possibly being without Teddy even if, at a minimum, a good portion of the salary remains. It stands to reason they are leaning toward the former option rather than the latter, supported by the comments at the end of the season and start of the offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KSpan said:

Majority of the salary is now a sunk cost (to what degree is variable across a spectrum), so the decision comes down to what the team values for that sunk cost. If they place higher value on the roster spot/flexibility in having other players potentially see the field/etc then that's what they're buying with the cost associated with the decision to cut/trade. If they place higher value on having Teddy on the roster for X/Y/Z reason(s) then that's what they're buying with the sunk cost of the decision to retain.

My opinion is that while neither is optimal the team is better off in the former scenario, but there is a long time to go between now and the season. Teddy's presence itself is binary amongst the spectrum of possible financial outcomes. At this point the team seems fine with possibly being without Teddy even if, at a minimum, a good portion of the salary remains. It stands to reason they are leaning toward the former option rather than the latter, supported by the comments at the end of the season and start of the offseason.

Unlike the other 99.8%...

...you do deserve credit for  a modicum of logic and a somewhat cogent position.

Good onya mate.

Edited by SizzleBuzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Irony yes you could say that as long as there is no intent to claim that because he left we all of a sudden got so bad we are losing all the time. Which it seems like you might be trying to imply.  Did we lose something? Yes we did. Was it worth 5 years at 28 mil per? Not to my thinking.   
    • https://www.facebook.com/MEMES.of.the.NFL/videos/779983564773360/ LOL 
    • First: What do you think the word ‘scapegoating’ means? Because what I said was not scapegoating.  They are two different players playing two different roles.  I simply said two things about Burns, if I recall. One, basically he is a one dimensional player that is doing well because they have a very strong front in NY.  Two, I was against paying his price because he is a liability against the run. One dimensional and therefore not worth it.  Summing it up: he e is a pass rush specialist, about all I have ever felt about him, and his financial demands made him much less of a value.  IMO. 
×
×
  • Create New...