Bosa deal done. Burns, are you next?

[panthers55]

One thought. Maybe we should wait to see what the actual contract says before whining about how much he is getting.  If it is Bosa money then bitch, otherwise it is rather premature.

[CRA]

9 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I understand he's not in that tier. It still doesn't matter the market is set with Bosa. What those other guys got a few years ago means nothing.

Bosa reset the top of his tier.  The one Burns isn't in.  And we have seen guys recently in Burns tier do their contracts while the Bosa tier has kept getting reset.  So again, Burns should be at the top of the tier below.  Which means, you don't need to keep talking about Bosa.   You need to talk about Burns resetting the tier Chubb and company are in.  Which is still stupid money. 

Fitt should be fired today if he does Bosa guaranteed money IMO.  And guaranteed money is all we should be talking about. 

[csx]

It would benefit a lot of you to read more than the Huddle.

Contracts from previous year(s) mean nothing. It's about the market at this moment. Try to buy a house or car or gas for the price it was in the past. Good luck.

 

Edited September 7, 2023 by csx

[CRA]

1 minute ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

So what exactly are you expecting Burns contract to look like?

 

Im saying based off the Bosa deal he will get 28-30mil per year with 90mil guaranteed.

too much talk on the per yer stuff.   That's not my issue. 

Burns leans too one dimensional IMO for even 90 mill.   That's why he is in the tier below to begin with. I personally think he should top out at around 75ish guaranteed range.  Which is stupid money and the highest of the tier below by a decent margin.    

 

 

[csx]

Whine about paying him or white about not having him. Perfect scenario for whiners.

[carpanfan96]

1 hour ago, CRA said:

There is a 40-60 million guaranteed tier.....and there is a 100 million tier.  Burns is in the 40-60 million tier.  You can even let him reset the top of it like Bosa just did with his tier. 

But Burns isn't worth 100+ guaranteed.   He isn't the complete and dominant player like those that belong there. 

and folks really need to talk about guranteed and not average per year.  Guaranteed is what counts, the rest if window dressing. 

He's not gonna get 100m guaranteed. More like somewhere between 80-90m, maybe a little less. 

 

The deal I put out last night was

5 years 143m with 90m guaranteed 

Edited September 7, 2023 by carpanfan96

[ForJimmy]

20 minutes ago, carpanfan96 said:

He's not gonna get 100m guaranteed. More like somewhere between 80-90m, maybe a little less. 

 

The deal I put out last night was

5 years 143m with 90m guaranteed 

Are those your numbers or are you reading/hearing that somewhere?

[Move the Panthers to Raleigh]

3 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Fitt fuged up.  Clear as day now.   

And yet people still defend the move. The smart ones here realized it was a massive fug up at the time 

[csx]

5 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The same people whining about not wanting to pay him will whine about the result of not paying him.

Edited September 7, 2023 by csx

[OceanPanther]

I realize how important sacks are.  Sometimes if you have a great defensive on one side, and a good one on the other end ,, then the great one could get home more because of less double teams.. 

Then think of this,   17 games, and lets use a arbitrary number of 25 ,, the QBs throw 25 times a game.  You say that time the 17 game and that's 425 times your GREAT pass rusher  has a shot at the QB .    If he gets 12 sacks a year ,,  that means he gets home   0.028 % of the time.  Or once every 35 times the QB drops back.  

Crazy money for salaries based on "sacks" .    

Gawd I hope my numbers are right lol..  

[CRA]

5 minutes ago, csx said:

The same people whining about not wanting to pay him will whine about the result of not paying him.

I mean, we aren't in win now mode.  We are in developing Bryce Young build around him mode.  

If you have a good front office....you should be able to generate pressure in a 3-4 scheme with a well built roster.   Without breaking the bank on any one player IMO.   And it should be a couple years before we are legitimately trying to make a run so we have some time to build up the roster as well.  

[CRA]

for 120+ guaranteed? I'd rather go pay for a proven dominant DT and a dominant pass rusher.    Because you can get 2 for the same price.  Roster management. 

the best DTs have just been signed for 60.  And some of the best pass rushers in the game just signed for less than 60.  Market hasn't been flipped on it's head because of Bosa.  The other Bosa, Garrett, and Mack already were getting stupid 100+ guaranteed. 

end of the day, I'd rather have a well built roster than a handful of studs.  That's always been a Panther problem. 

[JawnyBlaze]

7 minutes ago, OceanPanther said:

I realize how important sacks are.  Sometimes if you have a great defensive on one side, and a good one on the other end ,, then the great one could get home more because of less double teams.. 

Then think of this,   17 games, and lets use a arbitrary number of 25 ,, the QBs throw 25 times a game.  You say that time the 17 game and that's 425 times your GREAT pass rusher  has a shot at the QB .    If he gets 12 sacks a year ,,  that means he gets home   0.028 % of the time.  Or once every 35 times the QB drops back.  

Crazy money for salaries based on "sacks" .    

Gawd I hope my numbers are right lol..  

that the problem with over emphasizing stats in general, they don’t reflect the actual impact. Pass rushers do more than just get sacks. Just to name a couple other ways they impact, pressures lead to bad throws (incompletions and interceptions). Double teams lead to other players being able to make an impact.  There’s a lot more to it than “they get a sack .028% of the time”.  It’s also why DTs can command high salaries despite usually not getting much on the stat sheet, and why even ones who aren’t Donald are still extremely valuable and expensive despite not showing up on the stat sheet much. 

[OceanPanther]

5 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

that the problem with over emphasizing stats in general, they don’t reflect the actual impact. Pass rushers do more than just get sacks. Just to name a couple other ways they impact, pressures lead to bad throws (incompletions and interceptions). Double teams lead to other players being able to make an impact.  There’s a lot more to it than “they get a sack .028% of the time”.  It’s also why DTs can command high salaries despite usually not getting much on the stat sheet, and why even ones who aren’t Donald are still extremely valuable and expensive despite not showing up on the stat sheet much. 

I don't disagree with you..  It's why I mentioned , who is playing on the other end of the defensive line determines how many double teams the Great Pass Rusher gets.   There's a lot more than sacks ..  but it seems to be the big stat we constantly hear.   How many teams design plays away from the defensive end,, etc.  But someone in management of these teams finds sacks very important.