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!

     

Attendance is getting bad, Panthers now offering buy one get one free


TheBigKat
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’ve never seen a BOGO promotion on Panthers seats, like ever!

 

it’s only going to get worse next season, no 1st round pick, no marquee player worth spending hard earned dollars to come watch, stadium will totally be an ‘away fans’ stadium for others to come in and watch their favorite teams tee off on our wounded duck product

 

 

IMG_4031.jpeg

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheBigKat said:

I’ve never seen a BOGO promotion on Panthers seats, like ever!

 

it’s only going to get worse next season, no 1st round pick, no marquee player worth spending hard earned dollars to come watch, stadium will totally be an ‘away fans’ stadium for others to come in and watch their favorite teams tee off on our wounded duck product

 

 

IMG_4031.jpeg

They couldn't give that sh*t away and I mean free get one free lol

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Lame Duck said:

You know things are bad when my 9 year old asked me not to buy him any Panthers gear.  He said he can’t be seen in it.

Same thing with my daughter. What used to be “our” team, is now, “did your team lose again, daddy?” 
 

lol. All I can do is laugh 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 3
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free wouldn't be worth it due to the parking and food expenses..............

Pay me $50 to $100 a seat to go and I would consider that as a break even freebie.

Right now I don't consider watching them on tv to be worth any time let alone money. Saw I guy at the gym with a Panther shirt on and he looked at me and laughed saying....."I'm not a football fan I just wear this to workout in but it looks like it gets too many laughs so I'll use it to sleep in instead" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AggieLean said:

Same thing with my daughter. What used to be “our” team, is now, “did your team lose again, daddy?” 
 

lol. All I can do is laugh 

Haha, yes!  My son used to be all about the Panthers but now he won’t even touch it.  I think Tepper is killing his future revenue stream big time.

  • Beer 1
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...