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!

     

Greg Olsen Exstention Saves Panthers $1.5 Million in Cap Space

NJPanthers12

By NJPanthers12,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Nate Dogg Rookie

Nate Dogg

Posted
Posted

1.5 million will go a long way in picking up another receiver

 

Why is the contract back loaded? I don't understand the big hits at the end. Isn't that what Hurney did to screw us?  I love Olsen, but I don't think it was very smart to put 10 million on the books for each of the last 2 years. He will be 33 and 34 years old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Squirrel Collaborator

Squirrel

Posted
Posted

Why is the contract back loaded? I don't understand the big hits at the end. Isn't that what Hurney did to screw us?  I love Olsen, but I don't think it was very smart to put 10 million on the books for each of the last 2 years. He will be 33 and 34 years old.

 

More of a 2 year contract.  Will need to see the guaranteed salary to see full effect. Last 2 years could be voidable with hardly any cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
uncfan888 Grand Master

uncfan888

Posted
Posted

Why is the contract back loaded? I don't understand the big hits at the end. Isn't that what Hurney did to screw us? I love Olsen, but I don't think it was very smart to put 10 million on the books for each of the last 2 years. He will be 33 and 34 years old.

Depends on how much is guaranteed.. they can restructure, ask him to take a pay cut, or cut him. I don't like the way it's set up either, though. DG better be planning on using that money for good things

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MCC Newbie

MCC

Posted
Posted

Why is the contract back loaded? I don't understand the big hits at the end. Isn't that what Hurney did to screw us? I love Olsen, but I don't think it was very smart to put 10 million on the books for each of the last 2 years. He will be 33 and 34 years old.

For one, it always makes sense to backload a contract a bit since they expect the salary cap to climb a bit in the next few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NJPanthers12 Proficient

NJPanthers12

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Depends on how much is guaranteed.. they can restructure, ask him to take a pay cut, or cut him. I don't like the way it's set up either, though. DG better be planning on using that money for good things

I think those good things are Cam and Luke. I also view this as only a 2-year extension. I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't make it to that last year. Also with the cap possibly raising almost 20 million in the next 2 years, I don't think a 10 million cap hit will be awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nate Dogg Rookie

Nate Dogg

Posted
Posted

Depends on how much is guaranteed.. they can restructure, ask him to take a pay cut, or cut him. I don't like the way it's set up either, though. DG better be planning on using that money for good things

 

I agree. I feel like it's setting us up for another Smitty scenario. However, Olsen is such a class act he might do what Gross did and just retire even though he has a couple more seasons left in the tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jdpanther5 Newbie

jdpanther5

Posted
Posted

I figured he may have reduced his base. Only way this would've actually saved money, though I was fine with using up $3m in space just to lock him down.

Why is the contract back loaded? I don't understand the big hits at the end. Isn't that what Hurney did to screw us? I love Olsen, but I don't think it was very smart to put 10 million on the books for each of the last 2 years. He will be 33 and 34 years old.

EDIT: Nevermind, didn't see his other tweet breaking it down further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nate Dogg Rookie

Nate Dogg

Posted
Posted

How is it backloaded? Yearly cap hits..

2015: $6.3m

2016: $7.1m

2017: $7.1m

2018: $6.5m

Though I'm sure there are some other incentives in there, damn good deal IMO.

 

That's looking a lot better. OP said cap hits were $6.3M, $5.1M, $10.35M & $9.75M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jdpanther5 Newbie

jdpanther5

Posted
Posted

That's looking a lot better. OP said cap hits were $6.3M, $5.1M, $10.35M & $9.75M.

That's my bad actually, I was breaking it down based on the assumption that the base was equally spread (I thought spotrac had it that way, but now it's blank there).

Looks like a recipe for a 2017 restructure if the reported numbers are right though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • frankw
      Game thread

      By frankw · Posted

      Man whether it's the Panthers or the Hornets it's crazy how many foolish talking heads there are in the local media. I just unsubscribed from locked on Hornets. Doug Branson with his cheesy mustache is an absolute clown especially when his partner isn't on. Talking about trading LaMelo because he can't win basketball games by himself with no semblance whatsoever of a legitimate Center. These YouTube personalities will say anything for a damn click.
    • trucpfan
      Dream big: Imagine this future and tell me how you feel

      By trucpfan · Posted

      I’m hoping for that exact same scenario, two seconds would be big for us. I’d hope for 3 impact players. A WR/DL/DE that can contribute like this current class would be key to our rebuild.
    • outlaw4
      Forget about Bryce, Dave Canales is who we should be talking about.

      By outlaw4 · Posted

      When I look at what I can find, a carryover problem from last season is our receivers are still unable to get enough separation on a consistent basis. Canales is certainly better at scheming them open, like how he sneaked out Thielen for a big play. But then he's also having Thielen running routes he frankly shouldn't be doing anymore. I feel part of the RZ issues is not really having anyone - after trading Diontae - who can make those quick cuts on a short field to give whoever is under center a wider window to throw. We also only have one guy with blazing speed in Thompkins and from what I could see, he's really used more to draw away coverage. I bring this all up because what Canales needs for sustained success - other than QB - is the other receiver pieces we'll be getting in the offseason.  Otherwise, I have to say that Canales isn't as afraid to be aggressive offensively. As others mentioned, still doesn't run the ball enough at times. Finally, I still feel his playcalls still doesn't line up with his mantra of getting rid of the ball within x amount of seconds. Maybe I count too slow. Oh, and I'm glad Canales first game after a bye looked good. I feared he'd be like Ron Rivera where we would fall flat on our faces.
×
×
  • Create New...