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!

     

Say Hardy walks...


ThatGuy

Recommended Posts

I want him to stay. He's good, crazy, and has an attitude that defenses cant have enough of. But… I just don't know how we can plan to pay him, Cam, and Luke in the future, and still have to fill like 20 spots? What I'm getting at is this. Getty loves "hog maulies" and I figure him to go after O-line early in the draft. By not signing hardy would we have enough cap to sign the likes of a Eric Decker if he was to hit the market? What kind of money would he cost? Couldn't be as bad as Hardy… I haven't seen much said about Decker. Its just so hard to get it right with WR in the draft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm correct, right now we have around 15 mil in cap space.

 

By making Dwill and Godfrey "June 1" cuts, that would free another additional 5-6 mil bumping us to 21mil. Some guys will be retained, but hopefully others will too restructure their contracts: Stewart, CJ, Olsen, Smitty, Kalil, and TD.

 

We should be able to make at least 1 or 2 bold moves, but Im not a fan of Eric Decker. I just dont see Decker having that kind of impact he is having in Denver here in Carolina. I'd rather go Nicks or probably a cheaper mover "Golden Tate".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see Decker leaving Denver if offered a ridiculous contract. I don't believe he's worth a huge contract. If Hardy walks, I would like to see Gettleman throw his hat in the ring for someone like Justin Tuck. The connection is there. Wouldn't mind taking a shot at Tillman and Nicks/Maclin assuming it wouldn't require a big contract to sign. We need the cap but we need to stay revelant also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if hardy walks, what you have to do is look at whatever contract numbers he gets from his new team and compare that to what we do with that money saved.

 

people are all concerned about making sure that we get something for hardy...well...cap space is something. if it helps lock up guys like cam and keek down the road and also allow us to bring in more talent in key areas without seeing a significant drop off in defense but seeing improvement on offense, then it was a good decision.

 

i like hardy, but as good as he is and as dominant a personality as he has, he's not worth sacrificing talent in other areas.

 

if we didn't have stewart's contract hanging over our heads and if CJ hadn't been given the monstrous contract he was (which i think was probably overkill), and of course weren't still dealing with leftover crappy cap stuff thanks to hurndog, we might not be in this situation.

 

but we are.

 

i hope we can work it out for him to stay, but i have to have faith in gettleman that he will make this team stronger in spite of losing hardy if that happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm correct, right now we have around 15 mil in cap space.

 

By making Dwill and Godfrey "June 1" cuts, that would free another additional 5-6 mil bumping us to 21mil. Some guys will be retained, but hopefully others will too restructure their contracts: Stewart, CJ, Olsen, Smitty, Khalil, and TD.

 

We should be able to make at least 1 or 2 bold moves, but Im not a fan of Eric Decker. I just dont see Decker having that kind of impact he is having in Denver here in Carolina. I'd rather go Nicks or probably a cheaper mover "Golden Tate".

 

What about cap rollover from this season? Couldn't that give us closer to $25 mil in cap space?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicks scares me, and would cost more… and what has Mario done? or Tate? I may be totally wrong here but isn't Mario and Tate close to the same as a Ginn or  Lafell? Decker does have Manning but it cant be all Manning. He didn't have the yards before he came but he did have the TD's. We need targets. Im not saying Decker would be all we need but it would be a damn good start. 

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...