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!

     

Panthers = Pretenders


Gokz1000

Recommended Posts

This guy is just about motivation for the Bucs & Panthers. His team will be sitting home.

Tampa Bay Bucs

Record: 9-3

Wouldn’t be something to see the Bucs at home for the Super Bowl? Won’t happen. Defensively, they’re a wet blanket, allowing an NFC best 16.7 points per game. But every time they leave Florida to play a decent team, they lose. They also lost at New Orleans, at Denver and at Dallas to a Brad Johnson-quarterbacked team. They cannot, and will not, catch lightning in a bottle and beat the Giants on the road in the NFC Championship. If they can win at Carolina and Tampa in the next two weeks, I’ll change my tune. Until then? Frauds.

Verdict: Pretenders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Cowboys are facing all kinds of elimination over the next few weeks, but the mainstream media would love for them to go on a miracle run and win the Super Bowl. That way their attempts to pump up Romo and make it look like he's not the pretty boy choke artist that he is would be somewhat justified.

Sadly, I guarantee you that the NFL feels the same way. They don't want to see the Panthers anywhere near the Super Bowl, if they can have Dallas instead.

Hell, a Cowboys vs Steelers Super Bowl would be a wet dream come true for ESPN and the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That game was played at home?

That guy is a f*cking idiot.

Hopefully the Cowgirls get voted to be the biggest NFC pretender

This gave me an Idea. Start having the Pretenderbowl. Chargers v Cowboys.

Sadly, I guarantee you that the NFL feels the same way. They don't want to see the Panthers anywhere near the Super Bowl, if they can have Dallas instead.

Hell, a Cowboys vs Steelers Super Bowl would be a wet dream come true for ESPN and the NFL.

NBC too, they would finally have people watching their preshow.

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...