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!

     

Carolina -1 vs. Philly


ncsutodd

Recommended Posts

But still the talking heads on ESPN radio are already pretty much calling Philly as a Super Bowl contender...

They are IMO but so are the Panthers. Also, given that our starting lineup had almost no changes, we should be playing at mid-season form sooner than any other team. I really think we'll start off the season very strong.

Plus they may just be getting Westbrook back and he'll probably be rusty for the first few weeks of the season. To me, he's the key to that offense, not McNabb. So that should help us, but overall I still expect a hard fought game and I'm thinking it's about 50/50 we come out with a W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are IMO but so are the Panthers. Also, given that our starting lineup had almost no changes, we should be playing at mid-season form sooner than any other team. I really think we'll start off the season very strong.

Plus they may just be getting Westbrook back and he'll probably be rusty for the first few weeks of the season. To me, he's the key to that offense, not McNabb. So that should help us, but overall I still expect a hard fought game and I'm thinking it's about 50/50 we come out with a W.

I agree, that's just what the talking heads are saying. I think we are contenders, but we aren't getting any love from the media in that respect, not an easy one, but obtainable. It's why you play the games out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I make it a point not to listen to anything those guys say. They make picks every week and they go around .500 or worse, without even picking against the spread. A blind monkey throwing darts at a board will give you about the same results as most of those idiots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I make it a point not to listen to anything those guys say. They make picks every week and they go around .500 or worse, without even picking against the spread. A blind monkey throwing darts at a board will give you about the same results as most of those idiots.

Agreed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad the "experts" are disrespecting the Panthers,it should fire the team up,the more they dis the Panthers the better!we all know what happens when they pick the Panthers to win the superbowl b4 any games are played(2004 season)!i never ever want to hear,in September,how great the Panthers are and how they will win it all!

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...