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!

     

REPORT: Panthers and Brian Burns not at all close to extension

TheSpecialJuan

By TheSpecialJuan,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Smithers Grand Master

Smithers

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Burns having all the leverage is exactly why he doesn't have a deal yet, because he's really holding out for absolute maximum top dollar.  If the team had even the slightest bit of leverage, they'd have been able to get him to come down on his demands a bit and the deal would be done.

Literally the only leverage the team has is that he's under contract this year and if he sits out, he losses about $1 million per game.  But even that is only minimal leverage as he knows how important he is to the team, we can't really afford to let him do that as it would significantly hurt out chances of winning games.

Once we turned down 2 first and it went public that we did so, we never had even an ounce of leverage in this negotiation.

Sure we do.  Tell him he can sit at home all year, not get paid, not accrue a season, and rinse and repeat next year if he’d like.  Leveon Bell that dude 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tukafan21 Grand Master

tukafan21

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Smithers said:

Sure we do.  Tell him he can sit at home all year, not get paid, not accrue a season, and rinse and repeat next year if he’d like.  Leveon Bell that dude 

That's not leverage, it's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Bell is the only player I think that has ever done that, every other player who has held out has shown up by week 12 or whatever they need to show up by to get their season counted and generally ends up with the player walking away in FA or being traded at some point, they don't usually do that and then sign a long term deal with the team.

Burns sitting out until then and showing up is literally the worst case scenario for us as it then can only play out one of two ways.  And both of them mean we don't have him for 10-12 games this year (I'm not sure what week they have to show up by to get the season towards FA) which only hurts the team as well.

1.  He completely balls out and because of that is able to get a contract above Bosa from either us or someone else (clearly worse than just re-signing him right now for $30 million a year)

2.  He struggles a bit from being away from the game for so long but someone still offers him a monster contract because of his potential and reason he struggled because of the holdout (and they would) and we lose him for nothing

The only way we're able to sign him next offseason for less than he wants right now is if he plays 17 games and really struggles while only putting up 4-5 sacks and that seems very unlikely.

We have zero leverage on this one, none, absolutely zilch.

Edited by tukafan21
Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankw Grand Master

frankw

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Smithers said:

Sure we do.  Tell him he can sit at home all year, not get paid, not accrue a season, and rinse and repeat next year if he’d like.  Leveon Bell that dude 

Bell played what has now become an increasingly devalued position at running back. This is not that.

Calm Down Champions League GIF by Liverpool FC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tukafan21 Grand Master

tukafan21

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Smithers said:

So keeping his 16M, plus fining him 50K per day isn’t leverage?  

No, it's not, because it hurts the team more than Burns.

First, the 50k I'm pretty sure only applies to players holding out during camp and/or only vets on their 2nd or later contract, not players who are still on their rookie deals or during the regular season.

Second, the keeping of his 16M isn't a threat as he'd always show up in time to accrue the season, so he'll still end up with 4-6 of it in the end.  Plus, he's going to sign a monster deal by next offseason regardless, he's not concerned with losing 10ish million this year when he'll then sign a deal with about $100M guaranteed.

Again, we have no leverage whatsoever here.

Edited by tukafan21
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smithers Grand Master

Smithers

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

No, it's not, because it hurts the team more than Burns.

First, the 50k I'm pretty sure only applies to players holding out during camp and/or only vets on their 2nd or later contract, not players who are still on their rookie deals or during the regular season.

Second, the keeping of his 16M isn't a threat as he'd always show up in time to accrue the season, so he'll still end up with 4-6 of it in the end.  Plus, he's going to sign a monster deal by next offseason regardless, he's not concerned with losing 10ish million this year when he'll then sign a deal with about $100M guaranteed.

Again, we have no leverage whatsoever here.

50k fine applies to players on the 5th year option.  

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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • DavidEng
      Canes vs Kings 3pm

      By DavidEng · Posted

      1st period was a Masterclass on defense by both teams. About time for the Canes let’s keep it up.
    • DavidEng
      Canes vs Kings 3pm

      By DavidEng · Posted

      Yes, it tells me they’ve improved significantly from sitting at what, 30-31st in the league on the PP to 11th now.
    • tukafan21
      Evero HC requests!

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I wanted someone to hire him so we got the picks, but I'm also not upset that he'll now be back. I genuinely don't understand why so many fans on here dislike him so much.  No, he's not perfect and made some mistakes this year, especially at the end of the playoff game and going so soft in coverage on the final drive. But considering this place torched him all offseason for us having the "worst defense in NFL history" last year.  Said in the whole pre-draft process how we had to go defense in round 1 because of it and then complained the rest of the offseason that we didn't do enough to improve the defensive roster. How do people say all that about the defense and then complain when he turned that same unit into a pretty respectable defense this year.  They were really the only reason we were in a lot of games for most of the season, as the middle part of the season they really stepped up and were playing like one of the better defenses in the league. I don't see any reason we can't improve even more next year if we spend another offseason focusing on adding pieces on that side of the ball, which we should be able to do with our draft picks and cap space. We had the historically worst defense ever last year and people are upset because we weren't the 85 Bears this year, make it make sense.
×
×
  • Create New...