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!

     

Carolina quietly cleared more cap with RA


Actionman0z
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Especially with the Packers just losing Adams, Robby had some trade value as it was. I can't believe Robby's little camp holdout turned into a $22M 2023 cap hit. Now it's a $9M dead cap if we cut him next year instead of $3M. Not sure it's worth it for an extra $5M to spend in a lame duck year

I think Robby will be fine this year. He will bounce back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, J.B. said:

This means he is back for 2022

From what I am hearing Baker might be able to be obtained for a 2 that could turn into a 1. 
if we could offer the 2023 2 (or 1), and maybe dump Darnold as part of it - we have the makings of a pretty darn good offense 

Nothing would be dumber than giving up next years picks. If we did that then this regime has truly learned nothing. It’s this line of thinking that has brought us where we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I’m sure we are in trouble because it means we are likely stuck having Robby play both years and stuff like that. It happened with Hurney and Short. That restructure added $4-5M in potential dead cap so we got the pleasure of watching him collect $26.5M for 5 games of poor play.

Restructuring is never a good thing cap wise because it means you need to spend more than your current cap space so you are stealing from the future. That is usually fine for teams competing but it’s just a sad attempt when it’s for a team with 15 total wins in 3 years.

I don't think many understands that.  

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I’m sure we are in trouble because it means we are likely stuck having Robby play both years and stuff like that. It happened with Hurney and Short. That restructure added $4-5M in potential dead cap so we got the pleasure of watching him collect $26.5M for 5 games of poor play.

Restructuring is never a good thing cap wise because it means you need to spend more than your current cap space so you are stealing from the future. That is usually fine for teams competing but it’s just a sad attempt when it’s for a team with 15 total wins in 3 years.

Tell that to the Saints

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jackie Lee said:

They were always contending. We're in a lame duck year with Rhule, why give him an extra $5M from our 2023 cap space to gamble with this year? Just short changes the next HC's free agency if Rhule gets fired

I believe Robby isn't the issue entirely. Even Steve Smith had frustrations and gave up on plays during the 2010 season with Clausen. It's a business decision sometimes, and it sounds like he wasn't going to kill himself (though at times he got close) for Sam fuging Darnold and our swinging gate of an offensive line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smithers said:

Yeah - we are about to make some big signings the next 24-48 hours.  We now know we have the cap space - time to ensure the other 21 starters are as good as they can be while we work to address the QB situation.  

C, LOG, MLB, RDE, and DT still need to be upgraded.  

On board with that but I’m optimistic about  Nixon and YGM. It’s sink or swim time for YGM. 

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

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...