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!

     

RUMOR: Panthers are trying to trade Christian McCaffrey to the Buffalo Bills & Robbie Anderson to the Green Bay Packers


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Toomers said:

How are the Panthers supposed to “eat” salary for two players with the league minimum base salaries? The dead money is gone. “Eating” salary would be like the Browns did with Baker, or Panthers did with Teddy. 

The Carolina Panthers are reportedly "very willing" to "eat salary" to complete trades involving Christian McCaffrey and Robbie Anderson, according to Jason La Canfora of the Washington Post.

I guess you have to ask Jason La Canfora of the Washington Post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, poundaway said:

The Carolina Panthers are reportedly "very willing" to "eat salary" to complete trades involving Christian McCaffrey and Robbie Anderson, according to Jason La Canfora of the Washington Post.

I guess you have to ask Jason La Canfora of the Washington Post.

Don’t have to. He’s incompetent. Always has been. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Toomers said:

And you’re back to default mode as usual. Figured I’d respond to both. 

You're sweet.  

No team, including the bills will take on CMC's contract, even without having to pay his bonus money which would be dead money on the Panthers books. Considering we're already in the read for next year, you seem the team going more in read just to ship CMC off to a team with playoff aspirations?

The only way CMC gets shipped, is if we don't take a hit on moving him. Fat chance of that happening. Seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, pantherclaw said:

You're sweet.  

No team, including the bills will take on CMC's contract, even without having to pay his bonus money which would be dead money on the Panthers books. Considering we're already in the read for next year, you seem the team going more in read just to ship CMC off to a team with playoff aspirations?

The only way CMC gets shipped, is if we don't take a hit on moving him. Fat chance of that happening. Seriously.

His contract is a 3 yr/36M to any team acquiring him. None guaranteed. Plus this year is for 575k. That’s where his “value” lies.  It’s posted above if you need help. 

 What needs changed? You can’t possibly make him cheaper to acquire when they are already making league minimum base salary? So where is this salary they are eating since it’s not the 18.5M they have to account for no matter what? 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Toomers said:

His contract is a 3 yr/36M to any team acquiring him. None guaranteed. Plus this year is for 575k. That’s where his “value” lies.  It’s posted above if you need help. 

 What needs changed? You can’t possibly make him cheaper to acquire when they are already making league minimum base salary? So where is this salary they are eating since it’s not the 18.5M they have to account for no matter what? 

I see that.

It doesn't show any bonuses that have already been paid, and any others they may or may not be in the remaining contract....

the dead money that we'd be on the hook for that would normally be pro-rated,  would then be dumped on next year's salary cap. 

HIs actual contract isn't bad, but you think the Panthers will dump 10s of millions of more dead money just to move CMC? 

I don't.  

BTW, I don't mind being wrong. I enjoy learning, and my memory is far from perfect, so I also forget stuff the joys of getting old and smoking a poo ton of pot when I was younger.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jackson113 said:

FB_IMG_1665526463657.jpg


This is the reason trades for players doesn't happen often in the NFL. The salary structure makes him even more valuable to the new team (cheap salaries ahead) but a ton of dead money for old team. 

You telling me CMC at basically free for this year and $12mil the next three years isn’t an attractive contract for the best RB in the league?

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...