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!

     

Banks of America stadium renovations


Ja  Rhule
 Share

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Panthercougar68 said:

I love the renderings the first thing I thought of was how much they resemble Tottenham stadium and that’s actually where they got their inspiration from.

I am of the belief that when time comes for a new stadium that Bank of America will not be torn down and will become Charlotte FC‘s out right

I agree.. Tepper will determine how much MLS interest there is... and if there is enough.. BOA will become Charlotte FC.. and Panthers Stadium will be elsewhere. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Say what you will, Tepper's influence is having a positive impact on the Charlotte sports scene.  Doubt Charlotte would have an MLS franchise without him.

Might have missed it: Did Dave ask the City Council to kick in some money for this renovation or is this entirely team funded?

The city always kicks out. Now if ONLY Tepper could get us a MLB team. Charlotte is ready for baseball. That beautiful knight's stadium could be a start. Maybe Tepper could buy the White Sox. Most of Chicago (born Cub fans like me) wouldn't care anyways.

I'd care more for the Sox if they were in Uptown Charlotte. That's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Raskle said:

Looks amazing! I'd be stoked if I were in Carolina to go, especially if I could score some of those club tickets. Very cool that they have the entrance to the pitch going through there.

Hopefully the visiting team has a similar set up so that we can boo them and pelt them with garbage. Home side "the Vault", visitor's side "The Gauntlet" .

  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

Hopefully the visiting team has a similar set up so that we can boo them and pelt them with garbage. Home side "the Vault", visitor's side "The Gauntlet" .

Great idea, but now there's a $40 fee in my tickets to pay for rotten tomatoes to throw at the opposing players

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

    • 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...