We Have To Find A Way To Keep Beast and Gamble

[ThunderKatt]

You never hear analyst talking about getting under cap to free up draftees.

[ThunderKatt]

You never hear analyst talking about getting under cap to free up draftees.

[ThunderKatt]

You never hear analyst talking about getting under cap to free up draftees.

[Rubi]

If I were a player I would NOT take a pay cut. It wouldn't be my problem if they cant keep the financials in order.

But as a fan...again just another big shout out to Hurney for the cap hell

[Pimpdaddy]

...stupid....keep us in mediocrity...

[CardiacCats]

No we don't. Neither are that important anynore

[Marguide]

the draft comes from a different cap space and isn't included, I believe.

That is not correct. They are part of the same salary cap.

Here's how it works...draft picks are counted at the rookie minimum until they sign a contract. And for most of the offseason, only the top 51 players count against the cap. Since the rookie minimum is the lowest salary, they basically have no impact on the cap until they get signed and until we reach the point that all 53 players on the roster count.

When people talk about a cap for picks, they're talking about a maximum dollar amount assigned to each team for signing their draft picks. Teams cannot exceed this amount. But that doesn't mean they aren't part of the same overall salary cap.

Clear as mud, right?

[Pimpdaddy]

...we have 5-7 btches on this team that don't conribute jack sht....gamble is one of them...we don't have that luxury especially if you want to get to the NFC championship...

[ThunderKatt]

That is not correct. They are part of the same salary cap.

Here's how it works...draft picks are counted at the rookie minimum until they sign a contract. And for most of the offseason, only the top 51 players count against the cap. Since the rookie minimum is the lowest salary, they basically have no impact on the cap until they get signed and until we reach the point that all 53 players on the roster count.

When people talk about a cap for picks, they're talking about a maximum dollar amount assigned to each team for signing their draft picks. Teams cannot exceed this amount. But that doesn't mean they aren't part of the same overall salary cap.

Clear as mud, right?

that's partially correct but from reading, the rookie cap doesn't affect the teams overall cap only their signing bonuses do. Here's an explanation http://russellstreetreport.com/an-explanation-of-how-the-rookie-salary-cap-really-work/.

[Marguide]

that's partially correct but from reading, the rookie cap doesn't affect the teams overall cap only their signing bonuses do. Here's an explanation http://russellstreet...p-really-work/.

Read it again. That article says exactly what I said above only in different words.

Specifically, signing bonuses for rookies once they sign their deal are treated exactly like any other player. In the case of draftees, their bonuses are spread over 4 years for purposes of the salary cap.

[CPF4LIFE]

I call 'em like I see em. Sorry it doesn't fly with you ha. I know I'm not alone in my assessment of Gamble. Those stats can be skewed to by QB's who were attacking our other corners more, which probably was a good strategy. They also don't take into account crunch time plays, where Gamble is notably bad. Just off the top of my head like the NFC championship game against Seattle, or that game against Cincinnati where he got smoked by Chad Johnson when all he had to do was extend his hands to deflect or get the pick. Last year was a rebound year for him I will admit openly. But again, with his cap hit, how could he be kept anyway? And is he worth that kind of investment for one rebound year? I say no

You had to go 5 to 6 years back just to make a point.....still not working. If we are gonna cut Gamble its gonna be for cap reasons only. Not because of his play, get over it. He has been the best cornerback the Panthers have ever drafted.

[Swaggasaurus]

You had to go 5 to 6 years back just to make a point.....still not working. If we are gonna cut Gamble its gonna be for cap reasons only. Not because of his play, get over it. He has been the best cornerback the Panthers have ever drafted.

But he is not worth his money. Thomas is better than any Panthers CB in recent memory and has confirmed to me that the key to stopping other teams vs. the pass is to get physical at the line. Gamble has always refused to do that.

[CPF4LIFE]

But he is not worth his money. Thomas is better than any Panthers CB in recent memory and has confirmed to me that the key to stopping other teams vs. the pass is to get physical at the line. Gamble has always refused to do that.

That exactly relates to what i said about him being cut because of cap issues.....come on man. And you cant be serious about that Thomas comment, i like the guy and he has upside but your jumping way over the gun with that statement. Lets not overly hype another player just to down Gamble please.

[ZB1224]

I agree that cutting Gamble is probably the right thing to do, but let's not pretend that he was just another CB. I understand people's traditionalist way of thinking, but stats do not lie. I've said it time and time again... stats do not lie. They might not tell the complete truth, but they absolutely do not lie. Gamble has been a top 5-10 CB in the NFL the last couple of years.