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!

     

Highest Paying Sports Teams In The World. (Panthers Rank 3Rd Nfl Team)


rmoneyg35

Recommended Posts

Espn just posted a ranking of the highest paying teams in the entire world, Amazingly the panthers are ranked the 3rd highest paying team in the NFL behind the Steelers and Raiders. Some Soccer teams were atop the list but who cares about soccer.

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top MLS players make like $2-4m while the bench warmers make $20k. The soccer leagues are in serious trouble because they don't have salary caps. All of the big clubs are in hardcore debt. The Glazers (own the Bucs) have like $1.5b in debt from Manchester United. The small clubs have tons of debt and never win anything.

So I'm glad the NBA and NFL have figured out how to keep franchises from losing so much money they have to fold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the number of players on a team factor into this in any way? I have no math smarts.

They rank them based on average annual salary. So the Panther's number gets pulled way down by rookies and kickers. The Panthers have a much higher payroll than the NBA teams but they are ranked below several of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Panthers def overpaid their players to make a point. We asked them to pay players but we meant sign a free agent or two. Not just give the old players a raise. Still, we had quite a bit of money sitting out games last year. Thomas Davis had a huge cap figure and Jon Beason made a bunch to. Deangelo made a ton of money for someone that splits time in the backfield. I love Shockey but his stats were not in line with his wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't realize MLS and CFL players made that much. 100,000+ a year isn't that bad for shitty leagues.

The problem is that MLS has the stars who could make as much as 5 mill, but there bottom of the bench guys get paid like 15,000 or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top MLS players make like $2-4m while the bench warmers make $20k. The soccer leagues are in serious trouble because they don't have salary caps. All of the big clubs are in hardcore debt. The Glazers (own the Bucs) have like $1.5b in debt from Manchester United. The small clubs have tons of debt and never win anything.

So I'm glad the NBA and NFL have figured out how to keep franchises from losing so much money they have to fold.

As as soccer fan(yes I'm serious) the bigger clubs aren't in much trouble. They can make very lucrative sponsorship deals that can put a dent in how much they owe. Plus there are tons of competitions to win. The smaller clubs have the problems.

Anyway a salary cap is a very good thing and definitely helps clubs like the Jags to stay afloat.

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...