I Don't understand the franchise and trade Hardy talk

[DaCityKats]

i think he wants to get paid and to win. if it's not an ideal situation he's got no incentive to agree to it and we're stuck with his franchise tag in a year that we need as much cap space as possible.

 

his incentive is a huge payday, that he worked his butt off to get. and if the panthers are stuck with the tag, you can still talk about a long term contract or just allow him to play on the tag and make another playoff push. 25 year old big dogs that rush the passer, do not walk away.

[coralreefer_1]

personally since this board is full of little more than Hardy talk...i will be glad to see him gtfo so we can go back to the usual irrelevent threads we are used to in the off season.

 

He is a beast, but seriously he wasnt all that (aside from 1 game where he racked up). I think many have such a hard on for him partly for his play, and partly also because he graced this board, and  has a what we might call "unique" personality (hes about crazy, and we like that)

 

#sickofhearingabouthardy

 

 

[Ricky Spanish]

This is incorrect. The Panthers can't just work out a trade with, let's say the Raiders (always a fun example) and then say good luck Hardy and Oakland. Have fun trying to figure that contract out, it's not our problem anymore.

 

don't we work with them to get the numbers right, and they take on the contract? I was not aware that we were on the hook for any money this way. 

[rayzor]

With out looking it up, Cassel and Allen.

and.....?

 

i need to see more before i have any confidence in it happening or believing it to be a realistic option with any real liklihood of happening.

 

it could happen, its just not something i would count on or plan around. 

 

teams just don't do it. players now getting to agree to the location now makes it even less likely.

[RoaringRiot]

With out looking it up, Cassel and Allen.

 

 

I feel like if it was such an easy thing to do and an obvious strategy, why wouldn't it happen on several teams every year?  Why can we only name two off the top of our heads?  

 

I wish/hope you guys are right and we get compensation for Hardy.  I just think he's a goner, personally.  

[chknwing]

so u think GMan is gonna let Hardy just walk, for nothing?

[thefuzz]

so u think GMan is gonna let Hardy just walk, for nothing?

 

I do.

[thefuzz]

With out looking it up, Cassel and Allen.

 

One is a QB coming off a winning season, the other was regarded as one of, if not the best pass rushers in the game, heading to a team that thought that they were 1 pass rusher from the SB.

 

I don't realistically see how we get much more than a compensatory pick.

[RoaringRiot]

so u think GMan is gonna let Hardy just walk, for nothing?

 

 

I think he's going to try and keep him here but ultimately he will walk because he wants and deserves more than we can pay him.  

[rayzor]

so u think GMan is gonna let Hardy just walk, for nothing?

it won't be for nothing.

 

we'd get a comp pick (so what it's basically an early 4th rounder) and the cap space to take care of more important players long term and add some more talent to needed areas without crippling the defense.

 

even with that, i don't know that we'll have a choice. we've got to be ready for that happening. i'm actually expecting that. it's not what i want, but we would still be fine and set up to make another playoff push.

 

sometimes you have to let good players walk. it's just the nature of the business. if the choice is letting him walk or signing him to a hurney-inspired contract that ends up crippling the team and making it hard to re-sign cam and keek, what would you rather do because those two choices are the most likely. and even if we tag him, we just push that decision back further and make other decisions even harder to make.

 

if we don't sign him to a long term deal this year, we aren't going to and i don't even see how we can do that considering the future contract deals coming up.

 

if we aren't going to re-sign him and everyone knows this, why would a team willing to sign him to some monster deal AND give up an early draft pick or two not just want to wait until later when all they have to do is offer him a big contract without giving up draft picks? 

[Ship]

If we could figure out a way to survive with the franchise tag for one year I think it would break his power to not accept a team who asks to trade for him. We could easily block his big long-term pay day (the tag would be plenty though) if he doesn't perform as well next year or something happens to him, the rest of his future takes a hit and he may not get the big money long-term anymore. Like others have said, he gambled once this last season, lets see if he can do it again. If he has a bad year next year then we can ditch him or lock him down for cheap and if he continues to blow up, we may be able to get in a better position financially next year.

 

Also if another team actually presents a trade with reasonable compensation for us and the money is right for him, I expect him to choose the money. He may want to win and may prefer a playoff team but I think if he is presented with two options of lower money and awesome team or lots of money and who cares what team, he'll go money first. 

[RoaringRiot]

it won't be for nothing.

 

we'd get a comp pick (so what it's basically an early 4th rounder) and the cap space to take care of more important players long term and add some more talent to needed areas without crippling the defense.

 

even with that, i don't know that we'll have a choice. we've got to be ready for that happening. i'm actually expecting that. it's not what i want, but we would still be fine and set up to make another playoff push.

 

sometimes you have to let good players walk. it's just the nature of the business. if the choice is letting him walk or signing him to a hurney-inspired contract that ends up crippling the team and making it hard to re-sign cam and keek, what would you rather do because those two choices are the most likely. and even if we tag him, we just push that decision back further and make other decisions even harder to make.

 

if we don't sign him to a long term deal this year, we aren't going to and i don't even see how we can do that considering the future contract deals coming up.

 

if we aren't going to re-sign him and everyone knows this, why would a team willing to sign him to some monster deal AND give up an early draft pick or two not just want to wait until later when all they have to do is offer him a big contract without giving up draft picks? 

 

 

All of the above.  

[RoaringRiot]

If we could figure out a way to survive with the franchise tag for one year I think it would break his power to not accept a team who asks to trade for him. We could easily block his big long-term pay day (the tag would be plenty though) if he doesn't perform as well next year or something happens to him, the rest of his future takes a hit and he may not get the big money long-term anymore. Like others have said, he gambled once this last season, lets see if he can do it again. If he has a bad year next year then we can ditch him or lock him down for cheap and if he continues to blow up, we may be able to get in a better position financially next year.

 

Also if another team actually presents a trade with reasonable compensation for us and the money is right for him, I expect him to choose the money. He may want to win and may prefer a playoff team but I think if he is presented with two options of lower money and awesome team or lots of money and who cares what team, he'll go money first. 

 

 

I would have no interest in paying Hardy FT money and then either ditching him or resigning him cheap because he has a bad 2014.  That, IMO, would be a huge fail. 

[Peppers90 NC]

I get that part but again he's going to want a signing bonus and we would be responsible for any signing bonus if he was traded which makes no sense on our end.

If this was such a plausible idea then somebody could cite examples of it happening in the past.

Tags are only guaranteed if player stays on team, no cap hit if traded.  I'd be very surprised if we can do this though.