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

[mrcompletely11]

And just like clockwork kupp is out for a quarter of the season.    Unreal.   

Edited September 9, 2023 by mrcompletely11

[Gerry Green]

17 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

I'm not going to bother with digging into it with all these contracts, but there is also a difference between guaranteed money and "guaranteed" money with how teams structure contracts these days to manipulate the cap.

A lot of time there aren't actual guarantees, but the contracts are written in a way that there are essentially non-guaranteed guaranteed money.

They'll do something where Year 3 of the contract isn't guaranteed at signing, but it becomes guaranteed if you're on the roster on Day 1 of the league year after the first year of the contract.

Those are the type of things where even if the player has an injury or epic bust of a season, they aren't going to cut the player before year 2 starts solely because of the dead money hit they'd have to take.  That's a way for players to get "guarantees" that aren't actually considered in the guaranteed money up front when the deal is signed.

Same thing with how contracts can be structured to where some of the early years of the contracts are full salary payments, knowing they won't/can't be cut due to dead money hits, and in each offseason the team takes that upcoming year's salary, re-structures it as a roster bonus and then vet min salary for the season to keep pushing the cap down the road.

Miller is on the back end of his career, so that guarantee seems right, but it wouldn't shock me if the Chubb deal had some of the above things in the structure of the contract to where he knows he's actually "guaranteed" more money than that in the end.

 

I truly believe that no matter how this works out, a good majority of the Huddle is going to freak.

[CRA]

39 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

I'm not going to bother with digging into it with all these contracts, but there is also a difference between guaranteed money and "guaranteed" money with how teams structure contracts these days to manipulate the cap.

A lot of time there aren't actual guarantees, but the contracts are written in a way that there are essentially non-guaranteed guaranteed money.

They'll do something where Year 3 of the contract isn't guaranteed at signing, but it becomes guaranteed if you're on the roster on Day 1 of the league year after the first year of the contract.

Those are the type of things where even if the player has an injury or epic bust of a season, they aren't going to cut the player before year 2 starts solely because of the dead money hit they'd have to take.  That's a way for players to get "guarantees" that aren't actually considered in the guaranteed money up front when the deal is signed.

Same thing with how contracts can be structured to where some of the early years of the contracts are full salary payments, knowing they won't/can't be cut due to dead money hits, and in each offseason the team takes that upcoming year's salary, re-structures it as a roster bonus and then vet min salary for the season to keep pushing the cap down the road.

Miller is on the back end of his career, so that guarantee seems right, but it wouldn't shock me if the Chubb deal had some of the above things in the structure of the contract to where he knows he's actually "guaranteed" more money than that in the end.

There is  just a reality.   Justin Jefferson and DJ Moore are in different tiers.   That doesn’t Moore isn’t a 1 or great. 

Brian Burns is in a different tier than Bosa.  Just like Chubb is.  Or Reddick is.  And the contracts do and should reflect it.  Which is that guaranteed money and that gigantic gap isn’t just creative contract wording. 
 

[CRA]

20 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

I truly believe that no matter how this works out, a good majority of the Huddle is going to freak.

No one will freak if Fitt does a good contract. They would celebrate it.  But Fitt worked himself into a bad negotiating corner.   Because we have a bad front office. 

[Castavar]

29 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

And just like clockwork kupp is out for a quarter of the season.    Unreal.   

And Stafford has spinal problems. We legitimately would have gotten TWO top 5 draft picks AND a early 2nd rounder

That trade denial will go down as one of the biggest flubs, ESPECIALLY if they don't even sign Burns lol Total incompetence

[The Lobo]

6 minutes ago, CRA said:

No one will freak if Fitt does a good contract. They would celebrate it.  But Fitt worked himself into a bad negotiating corner.   Because we have a bad front office. 

I’m not too cracked up on Tepper either, does that count as front office?

[tukafan21]

13 minutes ago, CRA said:

There is  just a reality.   Justin Jefferson and DJ Moore are in different tiers.   That doesn’t Moore isn’t a 1 or great. 

Brian Burns is in a different tier than Bosa.  Just like Chubb is.  Or Reddick is.  And the contracts do and should reflect it.  Which is that guaranteed money and that gigantic gap isn’t just creative contract wording. 
 

The problem with the way you're putting it is that it only works  that way when looking at everything individually, not the collective.

There are only so many players at every level, for example, let's say each position really only has 3 truly ELITE players, then each position has another 7 great players, another 10 really really good, another 10 that are pretty good, etc, etc.

Yes, in a vacuum and when looked at individually, only those 3 elite players in a position group should get that very top end money, then a step down for the next 7, another step down for the next 10, and even within those groups there is a sliding scale of course.

When the options are overpaying for someone in that second level or not having anyone in the Top 25 of a position, teams overpay because it's better than the alternative.  Sure, sometimes you can pass on the overpay and use the same money towards 2 other players who can be more effective for you than the 1, but that's not always the case.

When you have someone with Burns' upper end potential, you overpay to keep him because it's better than the alternative of losing him.

As the saying goes, sometimes a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush

Edited September 9, 2023 by tukafan21

[Gerry Green]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

No one will freak if Fitt does a good contract. They would celebrate it.  But Fitt worked himself into a bad negotiating corner.   Because we have a bad front office. 

 

See, that's the thing. You have no clue what Burns is asking for. But that doesn't stop you from taking the negative approach.

 

I can't believe how quickly you go straight to negative. No stopping at reasonable. It's either rosey or gone straight to pot with you.

 

I am not doing it anymore. There is enough negativity. I don't need it, and don't want it.

 

We have thousands of members. Go be negative with them. I'm sure you'll find some kindred spirits.

[CRA]

1 minute ago, The Lobo said:

I’m not too cracked up on Tepper either, does that count as front office?

I count Tepper when I say it  

[CRA]

Just now, Gerry Green said:

 

See, that's the thing. You have no clue what Burns is asking for. But that doesn't stop you from taking the negative approach.

 

I can't believe how quickly you go straight to negative. No stopping at reasonable. It's either rosey or gone straight to pot with you.

 

I am not doing it anymore. There is enough negativity. I don't need it, and don't want it.

 

We have thousands of members. Go be negative with them. I'm sure you'll find some kindred spirits.

It’s not negative.  It’s just football talk.  You have proven time and time again you are too emotionally invested in all things Panther IMO.   I’m not.  They just give me something to bullshit about. 

[tukafan21]

7 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

See, that's the thing. You have no clue what Burns is asking for. But that doesn't stop you from taking the negative approach.

 

I can't believe how quickly you go straight to negative. No stopping at reasonable. It's either rosey or gone straight to pot with you.

 

I am not doing it anymore. There is enough negativity. I don't need it, and don't want it.

 

We have thousands of members. Go be negative with them. I'm sure you'll find some kindred spirits.

I've disagreed with CRA on some posts here today, but this isn't one of them.

There is no way to frame this situation without the realization that Fitterer screwed himself on these negotiations, regardless of what Burns is asking for.  He turned down 2 first round picks for him, it became public, and now we're 22 hours away from the season kicking off and it's not even known yet if Burns is going to be willing to play.

He should have either made that trade, worked out an extension with Burns before turning the trade down, traded him before/during the draft, or signed him LONG before now.

Letting it get to this point, no matter what he's asking for, has put Fitterer in a downright terrible negotiating position, it really doesn't get much worse.

[tukafan21]

16 minutes ago, Castavar said:

And Stafford has spinal problems. We legitimately would have gotten TWO top 5 draft picks AND a early 2nd rounder

That trade denial will go down as one of the biggest flubs, ESPECIALLY if they don't even sign Burns lol Total incompetence

Eh, I get what you're saying as that's the current situation, but it's also a bit of a revisionist history by judging only from where things stand currently.

A big part of the reason the Rams are even in the position they are right now, looking at a potential Top 5 pick, is because they own their own pick next year for the first time in years.

If we made that trade last year and they still had 2 more years without their Firsts, it's a guaranteed certainty that their offseason plays out entirely differently.  They'd have kept Ramsey and pulled a Saints offseason by working cap magic to kick the can down the road and put a more competitive team on the field this season, no question about it.

They went into this season likely telling themselves that if they had a hot start, they'd use those draft picks to trade for players at the deadline (like maybe a Mike Evans) and if they didn't, they'd stay status quo and end up with a high draft pick.

Edited September 9, 2023 by tukafan21

[Gerry Green]

1 minute ago, tukafan21 said:

I've disagreed with CRA on some posts here today, but this isn't one of them.

There is no way to frame this situation without the realization that Fitterer screwed himself on these negotiations, regardless of what Burns is asking for.  He turned down 2 first round picks for him, it became public, and now we're 22 hours away from the season kicking off and it's not even known yet if Burns is going to be willing to play.

He should have either made that trade, worked out an extension with Burns before turning the trade down, traded him before/during the draft, or signed him LONG before now.

Letting it get to this point, no matter what he's asking for, has put Fitterer in a downright terrible negotiating position, it really doesn't get much worse.

 

Agree to disagree. Fitt ain't going anywhere. This is the first year of a whole new team. It could go right, and Fitt is lauded. It could go wrong, but no one sees that coming. We'll see. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

10 minutes ago, Gerry Green said:

 

See, that's the thing. You have no clue what Burns is asking for. But that doesn't stop you from taking the negative approach.

 

I can't believe how quickly you go straight to negative. No stopping at reasonable. It's either rosey or gone straight to pot with you.

 

I am not doing it anymore. There is enough negativity. I don't need it, and don't want it.

 

We have thousands of members. Go be negative with them. I'm sure you'll find some kindred spirits.

Guaranteed money is always the hang up in these contracts because it's the only number that really matters. 

He could sign a $750m 5 year contract with 0 guaranteed, shred his knee game 1 and get cut the next day with zero penalties. If he's got 100m guaranteed, he gets 100m no matter what. That's why that's always the sticking point.