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!

     

Jordan says Charlotte Hornets "sounds good"


Zod

Recommended Posts

adam silver said it could take up to 18 months to change. so this could take a while, I just hope they let us know its going to happen at some point

18 Months would equal the beginning of the 2014-15 season, which was our target from the start. Everything seems to be falling into place!

A lot of folk have been bringing up the fact that New Orleans' rebrand was 'expedited', but the reality is that it will have been almost exactly 18 months since Benson declared his intentions to rebrand his squad before they actually take the court as the Pelicans (April 2012 - October 2013).

I don't know anything concrete, but there have been whispers of something happening pretty doggone soon. I'm going to steal a page from the Cats' PR playbook: not sure about the timeframe, but I'd be shocked if we don't know something really soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Zod, if they announce the name change then it has to be done this year because no one would by merch. If they don't announce it this year, it's not because it's not happening, it's because they don't want merch prices to come to a stand still.

It's essentially the same thing they did in New Orleans. The only difference is no one knew exactly what they'd settled on until January, so it might've seemed like the wait between Hornets and Pelicans was shorter. The reality is that the two timelines (assuming the 'Cats act quickly) are pretty much mirror images of one another.

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...