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!

     

Smitty's foot infection


God

Recommended Posts

Something to worry about? Heard that Mortenson turd is calling it a staph infection. Not sure how long they last, but it would fugging suck if he misses any regular season games.

If so, Murphy and Lafell will have to step up unbelievably considering tutu armanti are bad and pilares seems to be solid but doesnt look like hes developed into a consistent starting/slot role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve Smith is on crutches at Panthers camp nursing his left foot infection.

We should note that ESPN's Chris Mortensen referred to it as a "staph infection" on Thursday night's NFL 32. Coach Ron Rivera acknowledged Smith would be listed as "out" if there were a regular season game today. The Panthers are treating the infection with antibiotics and "monitoring" the swelling. We're not worrying yet, but this looks like a situation worth tracking.

rotoworld...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If so, Murphy and Lafell will have to step up unbelievably considering tutu armanti and pilares are pretty bad.

Just out of curiosity, what have you seen from Pilares to indicate he is "pretty bad"?

Granted, he's had few opportunities, but he has always performed well when given a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is definitely something to be worried about. He cant do any work right now, so the longer it takes to heal, the longer it will take for him to get back in shape. I could see him missing a few regular season games.

Dude.........chill.

the phrase "get back in shape" should never be use when discussing 89.

everything is going to be fine.

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...