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!

     

Panthers plan to renegotiate the deal for RT Taylor Moton


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, blueandblackattack said:

Smart move. He's the only cornerstone on our o-line and the most expensive on the roster so far, so we gotta keep him but also find a way to make room. Still pretty young and hasn't missed much time. Very reliable. He's the closest thing to a right side Jordan Gross we've had. We gotta make room if we wanna keep this D intact and have room to make some free agent signings.

This. 

Moton is absolutely a stud and a leader on our oline. He has plenty left to be able to play. 

They want to extend him to lower his number, and keep him in. Panther uniform for a long time. No reason not to. 

 

This isn't kicking the can down the road. It is making sure we keep the best of our oline as we work to improve our oline. 

 

Edited by pantherclaw
  • Pie 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

But why kick the can down the road? Save future cap space for when we are ready (hopefully) to sign some key FA to make a playoff run. 

Using the term “kicking the can down the road” implies this is a negative that we are trying to put off. Moton is a good player. This is just us extending him and saying you’re 30 and a great RT who we want to be here long term. I really don’t see the issue here 

  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, jb2288 said:

Using the term “kicking the can down the road” implies this is a negative that we are trying to put off. Moton is a good player. This is just us extending him and saying you’re 30 and a great RT who we want to be here long term. I really don’t see the issue here 

A lot of extensions tend to be backloaded. I don’t like the idea of backloading a contract and spending that extra to bring in more expensive FAs when we arent in a winning position. If they did it and front load it, it’d be fine. Id just rather embrace the rebuild, pay the big money now while we’re going to have a lot of lower cost guys, and save that cap space for when we improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine that this is more likely an extension to get his cap number down for a few more years.

Prior to last year, Moton has consistently been good.  Good pass pro, good run blocking, great leadership.  Let's be real honest: the Reich/Brown offense was literally a flaming bag of feces.  Everyone ended up rolling around in it, covered in poo.  Moton is really good, and he needs to be retained.

I'm all for keeping him.  Also, I've about given up on caring what the salary cap is.  You have tools to continue to move money, contracts can be manipulated, etc.  Just get the guys here to play.  

What is the option?  Hope that Brady C is a good enough RT?  Draft one?  Spend capital on another starting quality RT?  I'd rather allocate more resources else where than try to replace a good, quality player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pantherclaw said:

This. 

Moton is absolutely a stud and a leader on our oline. He has plenty left to be able to play. 

They want to extend him to lower his number, and keep him in. Panther uniform for a long time. No reason not to. 

 

This isn't kicking the can down the road. It is making sure we keep the best of our oline as we work to improve our oline. 

 

 Backloading a contract for an aging player is the epitome of kicking the can down the road

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

 Backloading a contract for an aging player is the epitome of kicking the can down the road

Moton has been healthy and effective his entire career. Good OT's can last well into their 30's. There shouldn't be any discussion about getting rid of Moton unless he wants prime LT pay.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Moton has been healthy and effective his entire career. Good OT's can last well into their 30's. There shouldn't be any discussion about getting rid of Moton unless he wants prime LT pay.

Nobody is saying out right cut him or that he isnt productive, its just that the way his contract was set up and the fact that we are not winning in 2024 it just makes sense to absorb the hit instead of pushing that money, likely extending him longer to 4 or 5 years down the road.  That just doesnt make sense to me.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Nobody is saying out right cut him or that he isnt productive, its just that the way his contract was set up and the fact that we are not winning in 2024 it just makes sense to absorb the hit instead of pushing that money, likely extending him longer to 4 or 5 years down the road.  That just doesnt make sense to me.

It actually does to me. I have no issue giving him an extension. It allows us to rebuild the rest of the OL and not worry about finding a guy at RT, as well.

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

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

It actually does to me. I have no issue giving him an extension. It allows us to rebuild the rest of the OL and not worry about finding a guy at RT, as well.

he is under contract for 2 more years, the big 30 million hit is 2024.  We can still extend him after this year at a more reasonable rate.  The money he is owed for 2024 will get paid out no matter how you extend him.  The hit will come at some point and I would rather it be now instead of when we might be good and need to add some players from f/a.    Going from a 13 million cap hit to 30 is fuging nuts. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

he is under contract for 2 more years, the big 30 million hit is 2024.  We can still extend him after this year at a more reasonable rate.  The money he is owed for 2024 will get paid out no matter how you extend him.  The hit will come at some point and I would rather it be now instead of when we might be good and need to add some players from f/a.    Going from a 13 million cap hit to 30 is fuging nuts. 

I have no problem extending him, converting a big chunk to a signing bonus(lowering his cap hit) and having more money to either roll over to 2025 or spend on Luvu and Brown.

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

    • Um, no, just no. Bills, Chiefs, Chargers, Ravens, Bengals, Texans, Eagles, Commanders are 8 teams that it's not even a debate, they aren't trading their QB for Purdy. Patriots, Broncos, Titans, Giants, Bears, Vikings, Falcons are 7 more teams with QBs drafted in the last 2 years that also would rather stick with them than trade for Purdy as they all have more upside than he does. Lions, Packers, Cowboys, Bucs are 4 more that would likely keep their QB's as well, age aside for Goff, Dak, and Baker. Panthers and Colts are two teams in the same situation, QB's who have both struggled and shown flashes to where the teams probably stick with them because they drafted them, but in a re-draft of all QB's, they probably take Purdy over the guy they currently have. Jags, Cardinals, Dolphins, are 3 more with QB's who probably have a higher upside than Purdy but come with their own question marks, so debatable if they'd take Purdy over who they already have. That leaves Jets, Raiders, Steelers, Browns, Saints, Seahawks, and Rams. Rams would take him over Stafford for the future of course, but not for 2025, and I'd think the Seahawks would take him over Darnold, but honestly not sure if they would take him over Milroe at this moment as they really like his potential and have him for 4 years really cheap. That leaves 5 teams that I see who would absolutely take him over their current situation right now, and a handful of others who MIGHT take him over their current guy, a far cry from your 20.  
    • Agreed. Also as soon as they received the top pick in the next draft it was over. Bears won that trade. Gave up a top overall pick got one the next year plus pick 9, a couple 2nds, and DJ Moore a proven young WR. Had their 2024 pick from us be in the late teens or later it would be more debatable IMO. 
    • Option A:  Pay your starting QB starting QB money. Option B:  Look for a starting QB for 4-10 years (or longer) while wasting the talent at every other position.    How many of the top 20 QB's do you think are worth what they are being paid?   When you factor in the last year of his present deal his contract is really an average of 45 million per year which in today's QB market is a very, very good deal. I wish we'd had found a Brock Purdy to pay 50+ million a year right after we parted ways with Cam.  Ya'll go ahead and live in fairy tale land where good to great (much less elite) QB's are available to pay. Just the fact that they had the chance to pay Brock after the disaster of trading up for Lance is a testament that when you find a quarter back you can win with, complete in the playoffs and superbowls with, you pay him.  
×
×
  • Create New...