REPORT: Panthers and Brian Burns not at all close to extension

[BlackPanther22]

19 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Not just that… teams don’t do spontaneous interviews with executive staff. This is a requirement of the nfl… they tell teams when their executive staff need to speak to media. 

Yeaaaahhh, that’s solely on the media for not asking. Most of our media people are solid but there are some that were asking about a lot less important things than Burns’ contract last week. 

[pantherdad]

Joe Burrow just became the highest paid player in NFL history at $275 million. Suddenly the money Brian Burns wants seems like chump change.

[Rubi]

Turning down that Rams offer is so cringe right now. Those extra picks would’ve been fantastic for an actual rebuild.

You can sign several damn good defensive players with $30 mil vs just 1. 

this team is the football version of the hornets since Tepper took over. 

Edited September 8, 2023 by Rubi

[SmokinwithWilly]

32 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Since when has unproven talent been fantastic?

 

There's no guarantee we hit on those picks and one of those picks would have surely been used on a DE to replace Burns. Is a extra 1st worth losing our pass rush in Burns?

 

I think not. Also we would be in rebuild mode at that point. We literally just traded all our vets in CMC/Moore/Burns.

 

 

At this point we are in a rebuild mode. New QB, unproven WRs, a lot of new young players on offense and defense. Also, with those extra picks we may not have had to trade DJ. 

With the 2nd this year there were a couple of good DE prospects we could have grabbed. Yeah we would have missed Burns, but we would actually be able to build around our rookie QB. 

You also need to remember that BY isn't a sure thing either. You're acting like he's a guaranteed HoF and he hasn't taken a single game snap yet. 

We need to sign Burns but we don't need to break the bank to do it. We still need to re sign Chinn, Brown, Luvu. There's only so much to go around. 

I'm good with Burns at 26-28 with 80 guaranteed. He's not Bosa and doesn't deserve that level of a contract. Fitts fuged all this up with how he handled the trade offer and the pressers following.

I don't blame Burns for wanting to get his. But if we're going to build a perennial winner we can't have 4-5 elite salaried players and a whole bunch of JAGs because that's all we can afford. 

[Sean Payton's Vicodin]

1 hour ago, Rubi said:

Turning down that Rams offer is so cringe right now. Those extra picks would’ve been fantastic for an actual rebuild.

You can sign several damn good defensive players with $30 mil vs just 1. 

this team is the football version of the hornets since Tepper took over. 

We coulda had Bryce Young throwing to Marvin Harrison Jr. on rookies deals LMFAO

 

[PantherKyle]

Not much is as maddening to me as panther fans treatment of Brian burns. The dude is special, young, and not even in his prime. You pay home grown talents at premium positions. The contract won’t be top 5 in a few years. Secure him with a rookie qb. It’s a no brainer. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

42 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I hate to break it to you but elite players have to be paid. We just can't keep trading our elite guys for picks. That's how you stay in a rebuild.

 

Brown has to be paid. Horn has to be paid. Are we going to trade them to when it's time give them an extension?

 

 

If they're asking for well beyond their production, absolutely. Like I said, this isn't about Burns getting paid. He deserves to get paid as a high level pass rush specialist. He is not a complete defensive player at this point in his career. That's not talking bad about him or calling him a crap player. He's very good against the pass and below average against the run. In 4 years he's never taken over a game defensively. Elite players do that. Paying him a Bosa size contract is stupid because he's not a Bosa caliber player. 

Like I said, I'm not pissed at Burns. I'm pissed at Fitts for how badly he's handled this. Every bit of this was predictable. If we're going to rebuild, rebuild. Don't do this half ass pretend we're a QB away from being a contender BS. 

[Jackie Lee]

2 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

If they're asking for well beyond their production, absolutely. Like I said, this isn't about Burns getting paid. He deserves to get paid as a high level pass rush specialist. He is not a complete defensive player at this point in his career. That's not talking bad about him or calling him a crap player. He's very good against the pass and below average against the run. In 4 years he's never taken over a game defensively. Elite players do that. Paying him a Bosa size contract is stupid because he's not a Bosa caliber player. 

Like I said, I'm not pissed at Burns. I'm pissed at Fitts for how badly he's handled this. Every bit of this was predictable. If we're going to rebuild, rebuild. Don't do this half ass pretend we're a QB away from being a contender BS. 

His philosophy was have your roster so you can drop the rookie QB in, now it seems like we got the QB and have a buncha holes lol...b4 game 1 at that...

 

[SmittysLawnGuy]

4 hours ago, Rubi said:

Turning down that Rams offer is so cringe right now. Those extra picks would’ve been fantastic for an actual rebuild.

You can sign several damn good defensive players with $30 mil vs just 1. 

this team is the football version of the hornets since Tepper took over. 

Sadly you are right, colud be the number 1 pick next year, if we believe in Bryce, I'm sure you know what that could net us, yes people Brian Burns may have cost us 6 firsts.

Edited September 8, 2023 by SmittysLawnGuy

[KSpan]

7 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Just because we are not a contender doesn't mean we should trade all of our elite players. If this was a full rebuild Burns would be on the Rams right now.

 

Burns was obviously in our long term plans if we turned down 2 1st.

 

Contract will get done. I don't care too much what it is as long as it's reasonable. 

The front office, maybe even including Tepper, misjudging where the team was at and the work required to turn things around with a new staff, new schemes, new QB, new skill position players, etc, does not mean it's not a rebuid or restart. It pretty clearly is. To your original question no, you don't always trade players that need to be paid, but in some situations it makes sense to do so. This was one of them and they blew it, a bounty of picks to grow with a shiny new rookie QB and a ton of cap room for a guy that is driving to be paid more than his on-field contribution to date. MAybe he earns it and grows into a more complete player. Only time will tell.

The flip argument here is that a team doesn't always have to hang on to every one of their good players - that can be a path to cap purgatory. See Deangelo and Stewart, Olsen, TD, etc.

[Rubi]

10 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Since when has unproven talent been fantastic?

 

There's no guarantee we hit on those picks and one of those picks would have surely been used on a DE to replace Burns. Is a extra 1st worth losing our pass rush in Burns?

 

I think not. Also we would be in rebuild mode at that point. We literally just traded all our vets in CMC/Moore/Burns.

 

 

You can sign vet defenders who are quality. Yea you draft to replace people. That’s how the league works. 

Edited September 8, 2023 by Rubi

[csx]

12 hours ago, BlackPanther22 said:

Yeaaaahhh, that’s solely on the media for not asking. Most of our media people are solid but there are some that were asking about a lot less important things than Burns’ contract last week. 

It's a waste of a question. They know they wont get any answer other than "we don't discuss contract negotiations".  There are much more useful questions to ask.

[MHS831]

Some of you may be familiar with the book by Jim Collins entitled Good to Great. While his conclusions are not always consistent (Cherry picked), he makes a point that underlies his primary theme:

Good is the enemy of Great because most people are satisfied with being good.  There is less motivation to take that next step because you reached a status of being good at your job.

In the NFL, the line between good and great is blurry.  So much depends on your scheme, quality of teammates, random opportunity, etc.  The difference between 10 sacks and 15 sacks, if you think about it, is 5 plays over the course of about 450 passing opportunities for each player.   Some are awarded sacks when the defensive backs cover up the QBs options and the clock runs out, forcing him into the grasp of an otherwise stonewalled edge rusher.  Other times middle pressure forces the QB to hold the ball etc etc. 

The better gauge of an edge rusher's worth might be to see how his presence impacts the offense--do they keep a RB or TE in to chip him?  How many pressures does he get?  Etc.  I dunno.  So I understand why this is problematic.  Burns averages 9.5 sacks for his 4-year career.  However,over the last 3 seasons, he has averaged about 33 solo tackles and 21 QB hits.  He has averaged about 9.5 tackles for loss over the same period.  His DB play has been erratic at best--so how does that stack up vs. Bosa?  The biggest difference (he was injured his second year, so I am looking at his top 3 seasons) is in the area of QB hits--Bosa averaged about 33 hits per season, 12 more than Burns.  Bosa averaged 38 solo tackles per season, compared to Burns 33.  And in Bosa's top 3 seasons (rookie, 3 and 4) he averaged 14.33 sacks per season, vs. Burns' 9.5.

In my estimation, Burns is good, Bosa is great. We shall see how much difference their paychecks reflect

Edited September 8, 2023 by MHS831

[Leaky_Faucet]

19 hours ago, Leaky_Faucet said:

Have been told they are close. 

Conversations last night stopped at GTD money again. Closer but still not there. 

Have been told if Burns holds out Sunday it is highly likely he will be found a new home.