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!

     

Well, Fewell is the hire. Be ready...

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Anybodyhome Grand Master

Anybodyhome

Posted
Posted

If this is true then why did we fire Fox?? It seriously makes me question what the hell Jerry Richardson is doing.

Did you not see the presser? Couldn't you see the look of sheer and utter excitement on JR's face when he told everyone how enthusiastic and excited he was?

He was like the dude on the Visa Super Bowl commercial who has been to every SB when he said, "They call me Mr. Excitement..." deadpanned as hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted

agreed. i'm not loving this idea at all.

it's just playing it safe if it is the direction they want to go. no balls.

crap like this make people want to jump ship.

JR: Hey, Marty.....what did the Steelers do when Cowher left?

MH: They hired a coach that was pretty much the same as Bill, but was black.

JR: Cool, who out there is just like Foxy, but Black?

MH: Perry Fewell, but I am not even sure if he is as good as Fox was last season.

JR: No matter, bring him in. I am going to go rub one out to that pic of Mr. Rooney I have in the bathroom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anybodyhome Grand Master

Anybodyhome

Posted
Posted

After that press conference, I wouldn't count out this scenario:

Panthers hire John Fox 2.0.

Panthers draft Luck... in spite of a John Fox 2.0 offense that will incredibly handcuff Luck.

Jerry Richardson, as he practically threatened during the presser, will try to play hardball with Luck and his agent and Luck will remain unsigned and ultimately return to the draft in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

Beware of the headline to your post. Mr. Scot says this is a bannable offense when you post a definitive statement as if it were fact....

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/forum/carolina-panthers/53363-my-opinion-for-new-coach-its-gruden.html

"Don't expect the mods to take kindly to this."

"Writing a headline and post that makes it sound like it's already happened without any sourcing? As often as not, that'll get you banned."

Did that story turn out to have any basis in fact? Any at all.

As for Zod, I don't really think he worries about being banned.

(and for the record, it's not that difficult to tell that this was a humorous thread, anyway)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      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.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      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...