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!

     

John Fox


Matt Foley

Recommended Posts

He inherited a 1-15 team, and it appears he is intent on leaving one for the next guy.

Delhomme, Peppers, Harris, Hoover, Diggs, Kemo, Lewis....this is what Seifert did before 2001, saying the Panthers were doomed to 7-9 seasons unless they went with a youth movement. He ditched Beuerlein and other vets, and when things went South, he had no one in his locker room to turn to.

Trading Harris makes NO sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would you assume Fox has anything to do with these personnel moves?

Seifert purged all our veterans because he couldn't coach them, they had seen through his B.S. he was hoping for a team of youngsters that wouldn't question him.

You seriously think Head Coach John Fox had no idea about releasing these players?

Get real man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He inherited a 1-15 team, and it appears he is intent on leaving one for the next guy.

Delhomme, Peppers, Harris, Hoover, Diggs, Kemo, Lewis....this is what Seifert did before 2001, saying the Panthers were doomed to 7-9 seasons unless they went with a youth movement. He ditched Beuerlein and other vets, and when things went South, he had no one in his locker room to turn to.

Trading Harris makes NO sense.

I know you were pretty high on Fox as a coach. Does this off-season change your viewpoint any?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Harris makes perfect sense for a team who feels they have good young guys who can fill in there. Harris was kind of a liability in pass coverage as well. My only problem with the trade was I wish it happened before the draft though Williams seems like he will be a good fill in just in case Davis is still hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would you assume Fox has anything to do with these personnel moves?

Seifert purged all our veterans because he couldn't coach them, they had seen through his B.S. he was hoping for a team of youngsters that wouldn't question him.

Do you think Fox would stick around if he didn't have say in personnel moves? Especially with a team that hasn't renewed his contract?

I don't think he would. He'll have no problem finding work elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in a way I feel the same way because Fox has got to have a say in trades, Hurney cant just go trading away players at will unless HE is the one wanting us to fail, but at the same time, if there is a lockout next year thats an extra year to build and get used to our new "youth movement" without having the losing season to go with it. not to say I think we r going to lose but it's a possibility when you take team chemistry away u lose alot of respect in the locker room. Personally I think we are good for 10+ wins, we do have a very easy schedule

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JR may be behind all this

Fox has turned over his coaching staff in last 3 seasons

Now all his vet players are being turned over

If the team still can't get it together

That only leaves one equation left from the orginal problem:smash:

All the cards have been dealt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you were pretty high on Fox as a coach. Does this off-season change your viewpoint any?

As a coach on the field, his record speaks for itself. I shouldn't have named this thread for Fox. It's the whole organization doing this. I just don't see what their vision is. Spending the whole offseason building up Moore, then drafting two of the top QBs. Purging veterans left and right. It works for New England because they have Brady to fall back on. But this reeks of a fire sale setting themselves up for high picks and money to spend on them. The fans are footing the bill, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • 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...