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!

     

What do you think we can get for Peppers.


Kurb

Recommended Posts

I could see us maybe working out a sign and trade deal. If we do that, then I think we may be able to get multiple high round picks Maybe a 1st and a third. I am afraid that with only a one year franchise sized deal, no team will want to give up a lot in return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two picks, a first and a third/fourth. And some cap space to boot, to hopefully go after Aso.

If that became reality, one could view this as a Peppers for 1st, 4th, and Aso...even though a direct trade with Oakland would seem unlikely. The scenario is intriguing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people are going to be disapointed with what the Panthers finally get for Peppers. All GMs know the predicament the Panthers are in with Gross and Peppers. They are going to wait and hope to get the steal of the century. Many teams do not want the expense that will come with signing Peppers. Peppers will take many teams out of the competition because they do not fit his expectations. I feel like Pep the Panthers and the fans are going to be disapointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though teams know our predicament, Peppers is still going to be THE biggest free agent out there.

Even if it is competition between only four or so teams, all of them are going to want Peppers so the bidding war will still be pretty good.

We will get a 1st and 4th AT WORST.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • 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...