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!

     

Thursday front office press conference 11am


Jackie Lee
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Panthercougar68 said:

There’s more stuff supporting my claim than the contrary lately. Schefter the main person

John McClain from Houston who recently deleted that tweet about ownership wanting Bryce over CJ

John Crumpler who is a Houston guy. Etc etc 

That's not what you said, you said everybody. Which I really doubt. You are talking about dumb teams in the first place because that is who picks up there.

there non stupid teams and that's I am thinking of. 

I shouldn't have said stupid, I should have said teams who are less astute.

Edited by strato
  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, strato said:

W

No it isn't semantics. It is logic.

The main argument from this CJ vs Bryce debate has always been that Houston had CJ 1 and panthers had Bryce 1 when both teams allegedly had Bryce 1.

The narratives being pushed around here on false info to puff out their chests are what I’m trying to deflate. Nothing more nothing less.

middle of a fantasy draft so take my take as you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Panthercougar68 said:

The main argument from this CJ vs Bryce debate has always been that Houston had CJ 1 and panthers had Bryce 1 when both teams allegedly had Bryce 1.

The narratives being pushed around here on false info to puff out their chests are what I’m trying to deflate. Nothing more nothing less.

middle of a fantasy draft so take my take as you want.

I don't need to get worked up about it (either), it's clear how I feel  and clear how you do. I was actually pissed about something else so felt like arguing lol. Have a good draft. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, MHS831 said:

We have not been "kicking the can down the road."  Moton can be extended / restructured and it would save us enough to get the debt back in the black.  I would like to keep him till he is 33 or so--I think he is 30 now.

We really have been doing that. The fact that the cap has been expanding nicely every year has helped but look at our 2021-2023 cap tables. $53M, $52M and $62M in dead cap carried in the last 3 years. Those were 30%, 25% and 20% of total cap and improved because overall cap space increased. Heck, still have $48M in dead cap this year from a 2-15 team.

We had to trade Burns early to be able to sign two Gs came about because we have been restructuring and using all of our cap space while winning 14 games in 2021-2023.

Restructuring Moton is the definition of kicking the can down the road. Remember the last 2 years when we had some discussions about cap space and we pointed to so much cap available in 2024? Well, 2024 hasn’t started and we need to restructure Moton to fit under the cap. We have a rookie QB, tons of no name cheap guys and near bottom talent pool and we are still kicking it down the road although we are definitely kicking a smaller and smaller can down the road.

 

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

17 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Dan Morgan's quote.  "It’s a big man’s league

 

how else are you to take it.  

 

So why did we not just sort our 90-man roster by height and just sign all of the tallest players then? Why did we keep 5’10 Diontae Johnson over 6’2 Terrace Marshall Jr.? I mean, he did say “it’s a big man’s league” after all…

  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jackie Lee said:

New practice squad WR Deon Cain might have been responsible with some of that cb depth churn after this last preseason game

 

 

Hard to tell which CBs those were but I do remember the one who was stiff armed to the ground was our rookie QB who’s not a big guy but wasn’t cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/29/2024 at 1:38 PM, strato said:

If Canales is going to be here, you have to send him in search of his quarterback because... if he can do this with retreads and with special case Bryce, you have to think he could hit a home run with his hand picked guy.

Okay. I was all the way out on Bryce, anyone was a better choice. If you have that kind of connection (to say you know for a fact) I wouldn't challenge that because I don't.

 

Let’s be clear. Bryce > Canales.

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

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...