Someone else thinks Allen keeps the job

[t96]

2 minutes ago, GreensboroPirate said:

Tell that to ERFA Alejandro Villanueva in 2017

He leveraged a minimum wage $600,000 contract into a 30 million dollar deal by holding out in the same exact position Kyle Allen will be in this offseason.

Who has more leverage;  an above average left tackle, or a potential franchise quarterback after the team no longer has Cam Newton, with Ron Rivera on the hotseat?

 

Villanueva also didn’t have any leverage at all, the team decided to extend him to a deal they felt was worth it which is fine for them to make that decision and maybe we would too with Allen, but he didn’t get that deal because of any leverage he had.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, GreensboroPirate said:

Tell that to ERFA Alejandro Villanueva in 2017

He leveraged a minimum wage $600,000 contract into a 30 million dollar deal by holding out in the same exact position Kyle Allen will be in this offseason.

Who has more leverage;  an above average left tackle, or a potential franchise quarterback after the team no longer has Cam Newton, with Ron Rivera on the hotseat?

 

t96 would be the worst player agent of all-time. Dude would be advising his client who has (if this situation plays out as discussed) proven himself over the course of a season as a capable starting QB to suck it up and play as a starting QB in the NFL for $700k because he "has no leverage".

Fuging hilarious.

[MVPccaffrey]

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Okay, this is just absolutely moronic.

Dumbest thing said on this board this month so far for sure, and completely invalidates his opinion on anything else.

Rae Curruth has better odds of playing for us next year than Allen does of doing so for 20 million

 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, t96 said:

Villanueva also didn’t have any leverage at all, the team decided to extend him to a deal they felt was worth it which is fine for them to make that decision and maybe we would too with Allen, but he didn’t get that deal because of any leverage he had.

AHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

This keeps getting better. The most hardball playing franchise in the NFL just decided to give a guy with no leverage a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract just out of the goodness of their hearts.

Hilarious.

[SBiii]

1 hour ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

If they choose to do that, I'd be behind it. The players and draft picks that could be had to make this team even better far outweighs the thought of Newton leaving Carolina. Thanks for your time here Cam, good luck in the future. 

Exactly what the Patriots did with Bledsoe.

[t96]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Failure to understand leverage confirmed. Either that or just unbelievably hard headed. 

You really think the Panthers are going to want Allen as a starter then when he says no thanks to playing for say $700k, they're just going to punt on having him as their starting QB AND punt on having him as a valuable trade asset just to puff their chest out and stick it to him (while also sticking it to themselves)? That would be insanely idiotic. If these events come to transpire, pay the man or trade the man. Period.

No one plays hardball better than the Steelers and a decent starting OT out-hardballed them in this same situation just a couple of years ago. Starting QBs have a helluva lot more leverage than starting OTs.

It’s not about sticking it to anyone. The CBA was negotiated by the players union and the NFL for a reason and each side has rights in it that successful teams need to take full advantage of to field a competitive team. When you have a QB like Allen who proves (we’re assuming his play holds up and Cam doesn’t come back, etc.) to be a possible franchise QB with 2 ERFA years, that is a tremendous competitive advantage over other teams and you have to exercise your rights that are given to teams in the CBA or you’re absolutely failing to do your job in fielding the best team possible. Would be completely foolish to just give away free money and cap space in the tens of millions and hinder the success of the team. 

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, t96 said:

It’s not about sticking it to anyone. The CBA was negotiated by the players union and the NFL for a reason and each side has rights in it that successful teams need to take full advantage of to field a competitive team. When you have a QB like Allen who proves (we’re assuming his play holds up and Cam doesn’t come back, etc.) to be a possible franchise QB with 2 ERFA years, that is a tremendous competitive advantage over other teams and you have to exercise your rights that are given to teams in the CBA or you’re absolutely failing to do your job in fielding the best team possible. Would be completely foolish to just give away free money and cap space in the tens of millions and hinder the success of the team. 

This isn't about the CBA. You're just viewing this from one perspective failing to understand that withholding one's playing services IS a firm of leverage, as is refusing to sign and thus denying a team of your trade value. That's why the Steelers gave Villanueva a multi-year, multi-season contract when per the CBA he had no leverage because he was tied to the Steelers. While it was true that he was tied to the Steelers, it wasn't true that he had no leverage.

[App Panther]

So our options are:

1. Pay Allen $20m and say goodbye to Cam.

2. Tender Allen for a 1st and kick the tires on Cam one more time

Is that about right?

[onmyown]

I still want to see how cam plays when he is back.

After that it becomes a question of just how much money he will demand. KA gives the Panthers leverage. If his cap will cripple the team move on. But if there is something left, Panthers need to do what they reasonably can to keep him.

[t96]

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

t96 would be the worst player agent of all-time. Dude would be advising his client who has (if this situation plays out as discussed) proven himself over the course of a season as a capable starting QB to suck it up and play as a starting QB in the NFL for $700k because he "has no leverage".

Fuging hilarious.

I think you’re confused. I’m not viewing it from the agent’s standpoint at all, because why would I? I’m interested in the team’s success and am looking at it only from that viewpoint. 

But let’s say I was the player agent. If the team is saying “play on the ERFA tender or don’t play” and is holding firm (which they absolutely should), it would be completely retarded to advise my player to hold out. It would gain nothing and only hurt the player more. Of course as an agent you’d do everything possible to find some compromise but if they aren’t willing to compromise then there is no other choice but to play on he ERFA deal.

 

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

AHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

This keeps getting better. The most hardball playing franchise in the NFL just decided to give a guy with no leverage a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract just out of the goodness of their hearts.

Hilarious.

The Villanueva situation is not even comparable to the Allen situation. Alli going into 2017 had one year of ERFA after starting 26 games the previous 2 years and showing he was a great LT.

The team was facing 1 super cheap year in 2017 and then a more expensive year or ability to match an offer sheet in the year after that with the risk of losing him. And then after that franchise tag or let him walk. They ultimately found a compromise that actually helped them more than just utilizing the ERFA year by signing him to a longer term deal well below market value that made it worth it to sign him and forego the cheap ERFA deal.

Yes Alli got a contract earlier but he didn’t actually help himself or get the best possible deal for him. He would’ve made way more money playing on the ERFA deal and then signing an offer sheet or playing on a RFA deal and then getting tagged or hitting UFA. Instead he signed a deal which is the 21st (!!!) highest paid LT, despite being a top 10 franchise LT. The team felt it was worth it to forego the one very cheap ERFA deal to have him on a bargain deal longer into the future. And we would do the same thing with Allen too, but that’s not the scenario you’re presenting.

15 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

This isn't about the CBA. You're just viewing this from one perspective failing to understand that withholding one's playing services IS a firm of leverage, as is refusing to sign and thus denying a team of your trade value. That's why the Steelers gave Villanueva a multi-year, multi-season contract when per the CBA he had no leverage because he was tied to the Steelers. While it was true that he was tied to the Steelers, it wasn't true that he had no leverage.

You’re right that withholding his services is a form of leverage. But realistically the player doesn’t have that option at all because no player would be willing to forfeit their entire NFL career over it, which is what the risk would be and there’d be a very high chance of that happening if the team held firm. see above regarding Alli.

[t96]

6 minutes ago, App Panther said:

So our options are:

1. Pay Allen $20m and say goodbye to Cam.

2. Tender Allen for a 1st and kick the tires on Cam one more time

Is that about right?

No, we can just keep Allen on a $600K deal the next two years and then on a roughly $4.5M deal or match an offer sheet if a team signed him to one, and hen could tag him in the future.

[Bartin]

33 minutes ago, GreensboroPirate said:

Tell that to ERFA Alejandro Villanueva in 2017

He leveraged a minimum wage $600,000 contract into a 30 million dollar deal by holding out in the same exact position Kyle Allen will be in this offseason.

Who has more leverage;  an above average left tackle, or a potential franchise quarterback after the team no longer has Cam Newton, with Ron Rivera on the hotseat?

 

Villanueva had 2 accrued seasons in 2017. Allen will only have had 1 after this year. He literally can’t sign a big contract until after the 2020 season.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Bartin said:

Villanueva had 2 accrued seasons in 2017. Allen will only have had 1 after this year. He literally can’t sign a big contract until after the 2020 season.

Can you provide a link for this? I can find nothing stating there is a difference I. The way ERFAs are handled after 1 accrued season vs. 2. Not necessarily saying there isn't, I'm just not seeing it.

[Bartin]

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Can you provide a link for this? I can find nothing stating there is a difference I. The way ERFAs are handled after 1 accrued season vs. 2. Not necessarily saying there isn't, I'm just not seeing it.

I’d have to go find it in the CBA probably