Potential contract headaches

[panthers55]

You mean the Patriots who had the 5th higest cap last year with 119 millions?

The same patriots who just gave Wilfork a 5 year 40 million contract and gave Moss a 3 year 27 million contract. Patriots is not afraid to pay their core players.

I see your point but lets not get ahead of ourself here. JR have never had problems paying his top players. To base an argument on that because he is not throwing around money right know it means he never is stupid. The obvious reason is the looming lockout.

Yes we could go 9-7 and then JR will see he can slip away with not using many money... And he has a point right?? He could also see that he could use some more money and go 10-6 and some more and go 11-5 etc. etc. It is all speculations and so is the thought that he will stop using money when the history tell you otherwise.

Damn P55 why so negative all of sudden? You used to be all positive and now the Panthers cant do anything right. Hope we see the light we need you over here:) :cheers2::cheers2:

You are taking one ot two guys and negating the bigger picture which is New England has a history of not overpaying for guys or falling in love with them to the point that they have to retain them. They paid Wilfork because honestly guys like him in a 3-4 are very hard to find. And Moss wasn't paid a ton when he went to New England but got a good contract after he produced.

Using your argument if we paid Beason 50 million for 5 years and paid Otah for example 45 million for 5 years but let Davis, Williams, Moore and Marshall go, would that say Richardson is willing to keep their core players?? New England also traded Seymour for example while he was still in his prime.

As for the future and being negative. I see it not as negative but realistic based on what is happening not on the past. We have a coach and staff who aren't extended, we have a GM who was offered an extension and hasn't signed it. We have at least a dozen critical players whose contracts will expire and to this point nothing has been done. We now have a pattern of veterans being released solely for budgetary purposes which hasn't happened before. We have an owner who used to spend money and now is not.

Is this a 1 year abberation or a harbinger of the future?

Until we know some answers, it is hard to be too positive at this point.

[Urrymonster]

In our rotation the third guy gets about 3/4ths of the snaps that the starters get. So yeah, Johnson's stats will be better, but he's not going to double his 2008 numbers and get 12 sacks or anything. 7-8 sacks and 40 tackles is probably realistic.

Last year playing time at DE:

Pep - 806 snaps from 16 games (1046 available snaps - 77%)

Brayton - 718 snaps from 15 games (969 available snaps - 74%)

Johnson - 427 snaps from 13 games (843 available snaps - 50%)

Brown - 401 snaps from 15 games (972 available snaps - 41%)

Taylor - 15 snaps from 2 games

So Johnson played just under 60% of the snaps Brayton did.

Regardless, if Johnson gets 7-8 sacks, he will have 17-18 in his career across 4 years and only 3 years that he featured in the first team defence. That works out around 6 snaps a season for a non full time player, which is pretty darn good production. The other thing to consider, is that at the close of this season, Johnson will be 24...

Do you honestly think someone would not get excited about the potential of a 24 year old who puts up around 6 sacks a year, has 4 years of experience and has only just been given a starting role?

[klumme]

You are taking one ot two guys and negating the bigger picture which is New England has a history of not overpaying for guys or falling in love with them to the point that they have to retain them. They paid Wilfork because honestly guys like him in a 3-4 are very hard to find. And Moss wasn't paid a ton when he went to New England but got a good contract after he produced.

Until we know some answers, it is hard to be too positive at this point.

They still had the 5th highest salarycap last year so they most be paying someone.

Yes this is the first time we cut veteran players and not using a lot of money but this is also the first time we have a looming lockout. Wait to see what happens when a new CBA is in place before you hang JR.

And BTW you compare us to Patriots and is still finding it hard to be positive? Huh?

[Urrymonster]

You are taking one ot two guys and negating the bigger picture which is New England has a history of not overpaying for guys or falling in love with them to the point that they have to retain them. They paid Wilfork because honestly guys like him in a 3-4 are very hard to find. And Moss wasn't paid a ton when he went to New England but got a good contract after he produced.

Using your argument if we paid Beason 50 million for 5 years and paid Otah for example 45 million for 5 years but let Davis, Williams, Moore and Marshall go, would that say Richardson is willing to keep their core players?? New England also traded Seymour for example while he was still in his prime.

As for the future and being negative. I see it not as negative but realistic based on what is happening not on the past. We have a coach and staff who aren't extended, we have a GM who was offered an extension and hasn't signed it. We have at least a dozen critical players whose contracts will expire and to this point nothing has been done. We now have a pattern of veterans being released solely for budgetary purposes which hasn't happened before. We have an owner who used to spend money and now is not.

Is this a 1 year abberation or a harbinger of the future?

Until we know some answers, it is hard to be too positive at this point.

Genuine question here.

What core players has NE let go when they were in their prime?

All I can think of is Seymour and Samuel. The rest of their roster was typically made up of youngsters and grizzled vets who played for moderate salaries. These guys stuck for years (Bruschi, Dillon, etc)

They have kept their OLine pretty consistent, QB, never had joy with a decent running back, LBs have had money invested into them...

Only positions which I can see turnover is WR & DB. I am unsure though, so please let me know if I ave the wrong end of the stick.

[pantherfan49]

Last year playing time at DE:

Pep - 806 snaps from 16 games (1046 available snaps - 77%)

Brayton - 718 snaps from 15 games (969 available snaps - 74%)

Johnson - 427 snaps from 13 games (843 available snaps - 50%)

Brown - 401 snaps from 15 games (972 available snaps - 41%)

Taylor - 15 snaps from 2 games

So Johnson played just under 60% of the snaps Brayton did.

Regardless, if Johnson gets 7-8 sacks, he will have 17-18 in his career across 4 years and only 3 years that he featured in the first team defence. That works out around 6 snaps a season for a non full time player, which is pretty darn good production. The other thing to consider, is that at the close of this season, Johnson will be 24...

Do you honestly think someone would not get excited about the potential of a 24 year old who puts up around 6 sacks a year, has 4 years of experience and has only just been given a starting role?

Thanks for the stats.

CJ was hurt last year, but the previous year in a part-time gig, he pulled down the QB 6 times. I wouldn't be surprised if he had a 10 sack season this year.

[panthers55]

They still had the 5th highest salarycap last year so they most be paying someone.

Yes this is the first time we cut veteran players and not using a lot of money but this is also the first time we have a looming lockout. Wait to see what happens when a new CBA is in place before you hang JR.

And BTW you compare us to Patriots and is still finding it hard to be positive? Huh?

You are confusing cap with payroll. In 2009 New England's payroll was 97.511,413. That was 23rd on the list. Ours last year was 112.738,038 which was 11th. Tops was the Giants at a little more than 137 million.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/totalpayroll.aspx?year=2009

So your point is incorrect. As for what the future holds, I agree we need to wait. That is why what you see as negative I see as the reality of the present. And right now there is not that much positive happening. Doesn't mean it won't or that this year won't turn out good. But at this point I am tempering my enthusiam. I am also pointing out that if we do well this year on the cheap there would be 40 million reasons for us to continue the pattern next year and get rid of or trade guys who will cost us big money if we think we have a younger guy able to replace him for cheaper. My case in point would be keeping Clausen who is on a rookie contract and getting rid of Moore who will want what a starting quarterback makes which was around 8-11 million last year. And the decisions may be more about money than production. If Fox is gone there is a good chance that we won't act on a bunch of contracts on defense until we know who the new guy will be and what scheme we will run.

Maybe I will be wrong but it feels to me that what is happening is not a one year thing but the wave of the future. And if we let popular players go due to salaries we better be successful. One of the things that drove the Hornets out of Charlotte (other than shinn keeping it in his pants) was allowing guys like Mourning to go who were popular and productive to save some money and we got the reputation of being cheap and unwilling to pay for a winner. Yes Richardson has not done that historically but isn't the general rule in football that this is a "what have you done lately" league. Shouldn't that apply to owners as well as players and coaches??

[panthers55]

Genuine question here.

What core players has NE let go when they were in their prime?

All I can think of is Seymour and Samuel. The rest of their roster was typically made up of youngsters and grizzled vets who played for moderate salaries. These guys stuck for years (Bruschi, Dillon, etc)

They have kept their OLine pretty consistent, QB, never had joy with a decent running back, LBs have had money invested into them...

Only positions which I can see turnover is WR & DB. I am unsure though, so please let me know if I ave the wrong end of the stick.

Where is Fireball when you need her. She was our resident NE person before she left.

I am claiming no great insight into NE but my observation was that they filled their roster with cheaper guys, retreads, guys given low tenders, other's throw aways etc. They don't tie a bunch into a contract until they are proven and even then they get discounts because they are were perenial Super Bowl finalists until lately. In the past many folks would take much less for the chance to play for them and win a championship so they didn't need to dump a bunch of guys. They go with young guys in the draft, and supplement heavily with guys in their mid 20s up through their mid thirties. They find guys on tenders, coming off the injured lists or guys with great potential caught on a team with great depth. Look at Wes Welker for example, he came there from Miami 4 years into the league and has blossomed into a great player. His salary for 2009 was 1.7 million. His deal was 5 years 18 million or around 3.5 million per year. He is still signed until 2012. At that point they will keep him for cheap because he is 31 or let him go.

As for quarterback what about Cassel? Look at Brady for example his salary in 2009 was 8 million. Now look at Cassel who they traded away because they weren't going to lock up a ton at that position. His salary was 15 million in 2009.

As for wide receivers they have let guys in their prime- what about Deion Branch.

Again I am no expert on them but it seems they have done a very good of keeping payroll down and finding great guys and not overpaying at any positions.