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!

     

Cowherd's Predictions


Mother Grabber

Recommended Posts

Says the Panthers will only go 5-11 this year. Says we still don't have the talent to compete in our division...

He'll feel dumb in a couple of months!

How do u guys feel about his moronic comments?

realistically we probably won't have the QB play to compete this year.....as Cam develops we should. Carolina will be competitive though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also said he wouldn't be suprised if we won 7 games. Not many of the mainstream media know that much about our current team because they really didn't cover us last year. I can't say that I blame them.

Every year there are a couple teams that come out of no where and are competitive. I can't say that we would be coming out of no where with the talent we have. As always, I will likely come down to our QB play. If we had a proven vet QB, I would say we could win 8-9 games all day long. If Otah is healthy I feel a lot better about our season. We can't run the ball the same without him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a rookie quarterback, the worst one last year, and a vet whose last good year was 2007, you can't expect more. We have a totally unproven staff and so it is hard to expect a winning season especially given our schedule.

If we get on a roll early who knows. Nothing makes winning a real possibility more than confidence and chemistry. If Newton can surprise and Anderson can regain some of his form of 2007, who knows what can happen. We do play in a very tough division for sure but we should be competitive. Most times the difference between 6-10 and 10-6 are a few critical plays that go either for or against you in a game.

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...