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!

     

I foresee Nathan Peterman as the next Panther QB


Basbear
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Panthers Fan 69 said:

This team and fanbase has hit a new low.  Trevor Siemian.  Nathan Peterman.  We are so trash that we are scrapping the bottom of the barrel.  

Siemian is definitely better than Peterman and Plummer, possibly Bryce. They don't want that kinda smoke in camp after the lackluster turnouts at the practices. This Peterman thread is a joke but at the same time I wouldn't put it past this team to bring him in knowing her won't outplay Bryce, I think Fowler mentioned in an article they aren't looking for a good qb, just an arm for two weeks which is dumb considering Morgan said he was gonna churn the bottom of the roster to find "dawgs"

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Siemian is definitely better than Peterman and Plummer, possibly Bryce. They don't want that kinda smoke in camp after the lackluster turnouts at the practices. This Peterman thread is a joke but at the same time I wouldn't put it past this team to bring him in knowing her won't outplay Bryce, I think Fowler mentioned in an article they aren't looking for a good qb, just an arm for two weeks which is dumb considering Morgan said he was gonna churn the bottom of the roster to find "dawgs"

AKA. Our QB sucks and we trying to find a diamond in the rough while waiting to draft our future next year. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jackie Lee said:

Siemian is definitely better than Peterman and Plummer, possibly Bryce. They don't want that kinda smoke in camp after the lackluster turnouts at the practices. This Peterman thread is a joke but at the same time I wouldn't put it past this team to bring him in knowing her won't outplay Bryce, I think Fowler mentioned in an article they aren't looking for a good qb, just an arm for two weeks which is dumb considering Morgan said he was gonna churn the bottom of the roster to find "dawgs"

They might go extra cheapo and bring in a relative unknown who has some experience with Canales- Danny Etling is a UFL QB that had two stints at the bottom of Seattle’s roster while Canales was there. 

  • 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

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...