Voth: CJ open to coming back

[electro's horse]

a past his prime DE? AND he went to UGA?

Dimitroff/Pioli/Whomever can't get to him fast enough.

[VerticalThreat]

Of course I'd take him back, my issue isn't CJ's production it's what we were paying him based on that production.  I don't fault him for wanting to see what he's worth to the market. If he could get even $1M more each year over the life of the contract, that could be $2-3M more. News flash: that's a lot of money to anyone regardless of how much money you've made. Ultimately, I trust  DG to make the right call on the finances and personnel moves, but having a vet like CJ in there doesn't hurt.

[Snake]

2 hours ago, MadHatter said:

Too many fans forget this is a business.  If a company came to you and offered you a few million a year more to leave your job, every one of you would probably blow out your ACL rushing for the door.

Let's put this in simple terms so you can understand. If I was making 150k a year(more than my family will ever need) with a company that was treating me right and had good management why would I leave for 170k? How will 20k more change my life? It want and that's why I don't need it.  You don't understand this obviously because like CJ you are greedy. Not everyone is all about the big money. 

[Davidson Deac II]

He isn't out badmouthing the team, and he seems to be a popular guy.  And personally, I think the injury had something to do with his performance drop this year.  He was healthier in the playoffs, and it showed on the field.  And I certainly don't blame him for testing the market.  Doing so is a practical decision.  So of course we would take him back for the right price. 

[Davidson Deac II]

25 minutes ago, Snake said:

Let's put this in simple terms so you can understand. If I was making 150k a year(more than my family will ever need) with a company that was treating me right and had good management why would I leave for 170k? How will 20k more change my life? It want and that's why I don't need it.  You don't understand this obviously because like CJ you are greedy. Not everyone is all about the big money. 

Except that is not the scenario that is occurring.

 

What if that employer told you that they were letting you go if you are unwilling to accept a salary cut from 150,000 to 80,000 a year?  And you thought you might be able to get 125,000 a year from a rival employer?  While I commend someone that would stay for the 80 a year if they are happy, I certainly don't blame anyone for looking for more money.  Or in this case, less of a paycut.   

[TalonNC]

5 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Except that is not the scenario that is occurring.

 

What if that employer told you that they were letting you go if you are unwilling to accept a salary cut from 150,000 to 80,000 a year?  And you thought you might be able to get 125,000 a year from a rival employer?  While I commend someone that would stay for the 80 a year if they are happy, I certainly don't blame anyone for looking for more money.  Or in this case, less of a paycut.   

 Just dont come back to the employer asking "Is that $80,000 still on the table?" cause its probably looking like $65,000 cause you wanted to bet your leverage on the open market... 

[Handsome Steve]

It's also impossible to compare this to "real world" scenarios, since something like 150,000 vs 80,000 would affect you and I very much, but when we are looking at someone who has more money then I'd ever be able to spend, and is basically set for life (I've heard he was very judicious with his money), it's hard to relate or understand. I'd take him back in a heartbeat, but I guess I can't blame him for seeing what he can get. I just can't relate to it at all.

[Smithers]

I doubt we would offer him anything at this point.  Even if he accepts 4 million (which would not happen), we are still on the hook for 8 million when counting the dead money.  Brining him back at any salary means we wasted 4 million dollars.  It is not happening.  

[pantherclaw]

I doubt anyone on the huddle , would take a paycut from their longtime emplyoyer, to do the same job, without first finding out if they could get more from another employer. 

The double standard on the huddle on this, is absolutely laughable because of hoe many are guilty of it.

[Bartin]

5 minutes ago, Smithers said:

I doubt we would offer him anything at this point.  Even if he accepts 4 million (which would not happen), we are still on the hook for 8 million when counting the dead money.  Brining him back at any salary means we wasted 4 million dollars.  It is not happening.  

That $4M is on the cap whether he players for the Panthers or not. It is a sunk cost and should absolutely not factor into any decision to potentially bring him back.

[luke nukem]

I can see him going to a team like the vikings or even Jacksonville(lol)

[Kurb]

15 hours ago, Jmac said:

According to Voth on BBR, Johnson wants to test the market first and would be willing to return. So he is looking for more money then D.G was willing to fork over. The man has made MILLONS of dollars from this club and was unwilling to return for the money offered. How many of you would want him back if he decides to take the Gettie figure after testing the market? Or would you rather move on from him and start anew, regardless if he would return?

Would you do the same at your job?

Im going to reduce your salary, you can go try and find another job or take the offer. 
You are welcome to come back after you test your market?

 

 

[Smithers]

1 hour ago, Bartin said:

That $4M is on the cap whether he players for the Panthers or not. It is a sunk cost and should absolutely not factor into any decision to potentially bring him back.

I disagree, because it would not have been lost money had he agreed to a deal before being cut.  It is lost money now, yes, but CJs refusal to take a pay cut resulted in the team losing that 4 million.  

 

Lets say DG offered CJ 6 million a year. CJ said no, explores FA, doesn't get a better offer, and comes back saying he will sign for 6 million.  DG would never go for it, as a smart businessman, because now that 6 million has become 10 million.  Had CJ agreed to begin with, 6 million would have been 6 million.

[Bartin]

9 minutes ago, Smithers said:

I disagree, because it would not have been lost money had he agreed to a deal before being cut.  It is lost money now, yes, but CJs refusal to take a pay cut resulted in the team losing that 4 million.  

 

Lets say DG offered CJ 6 million a year. CJ said no, explores FA, doesn't get a better offer, and comes back saying he will sign for 6 million.  DG would never go for it, as a smart businessman, because now that 6 million has become 10 million.  Had CJ agreed to begin with, 6 million would have been 6 million.

That's not how the salary cap works. The $4M is from a previously paid signing bonus. It was going to be there no matter what happened.