Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Panthers positional spending (Bill Voth)

Leeroy Jenkins PhD

By Leeroy Jenkins PhD,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

i wonder what the progress is, if any, to getting hardy's number down to a reasonable amount by committing more long term

 

A long-term deal for a marquee player features significant guaranteed money in the form of a signing bonus and usually base salaries that are back loaded.  The signing bonus money is allocated throughout the deal.  For example, here's the numbers on CJ's contract:

 

Year Base S. Bonus Misc. Cap Hit Dead

2011 4,000,000 6,000,000 - 10,000,000 32,000,000

2012 4,750,000 6,000,000 250,000 11,000,000 24,000,000

2013 1,070,000 7,420,000 250,000 8,740,000 23,680,000

2014 8,750,000 7,420,000 250,000 16,420,000 16,260,000

2015 9,750,000 7,420,000 250,000 17,420,000 6,000,000

2016 10,750,000 1,420,000 250,000 12,420,000

- 2017  UFA

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/charles-johnson/

 

Now, with that said, barring a restructure/extension, this is CJ's last season in Carolina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaSock Explorer

CarolinaSock

Posted
Posted

Dang, Voth calling Hardy the elite one out of the group. Truth

We gotta lock the Kracken up and do what we can to decrease CJs cap number. Getting rid of Hardy puts our weakness out front and center and will fully expose our weak secondary. Even if we had an elite secondary, which we have no way of getting one even if we didn't have Hardy's contract, a secondary is not as effective as an elite pass rush...as we witnessed last season. I wish you detractors of Hardy would let this sink in...

I think we can get away with allocating the money between these two for the next couple of seasons because all our receivers will be on rookie contracts. Once we find that upper-echelon WR, we are gonna have to pay him eventually.

Getting DLo and Stewart off the books is gonna make a huge difference because RBs can be found on the cheap nowadays.

Cam and Hardy are our biggest assets. No way we let either of them go without serious compensation in return. Anyone who says different is deluded and needs to rethink their priorities.

We know that we can get away with using rookies and vet-minimum defensive backs with our current front 7. No need to go away from what works. Star and Kuechly will demand big contracts and getting our running backs off the books will help open up that money.

CJ's contract is utterly ridiculous and the single reason why Hardy isn't locked up to a long deal. CJ is still in his prime but will start the downward turn in a couple years. Hardy will remain elite for the next 5 or 6 seasons and it wold be utterly stupid to let Hardy go befo we tried trading CJ first.

Right now we have CJ, Hardy, Kalil, Olsen, Williams, Stewart and Godfrey on big contracts.

Three years from now I'd like to see Hardy, Cam, Star, Luke, an OT and a WR with those big contracts instead. And with rookies under contract including a replacement DE for CJ, a replacement OLB for TD, and a replacement TE for Olsen playing under rookie contracts that will be up for big contracts within the next couple of years.

I left Kalil off because I feel he, ultimately, Will have to be replaced because of his inflated contract and we'll need that money for Cam and a LT.

CJ is only 2 years older than Hardy. He had 11 sacks even after being not 100% the last two months of the season. No one would even be calling Hardy elite if he didn't absolutely explode the last 2 games of the season. Remember Hardy had 7 sacks against the swiss cheese Atlanta line and a rookie Lt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peppers90 NC Community Regular

Peppers90 NC

Posted
Posted

A long-term deal for a marquee player features significant guaranteed money in the form of a signing bonus and usually base salaries that are back loaded.  The signing bonus money is allocated throughout the deal.  For example, here's the numbers on CJ's contract:

 

Year Base S. Bonus Misc. Cap Hit Dead

2011 4,000,000 6,000,000 - 10,000,000 32,000,000

2012 4,750,000 6,000,000 250,000 11,000,000 24,000,000

2013 1,070,000 7,420,000 250,000 8,740,000 23,680,000

2014 8,750,000 7,420,000 250,000 16,420,000 16,260,000

2015 9,750,000 7,420,000 250,000 17,420,000 6,000,000

2016 10,750,000 1,420,000 250,000 12,420,000

- 2017  UFA

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/charles-johnson/

 

Now, with that said, barring a restructure/extension, this is CJ's last season in Carolina.

I wouldnt use CJ's contract as a model though.  He was given more than he even expected probably to keep him from going to Atlanta plus Hurney loved doing blow and gave too much.  Regardless, a long term deal would lower his(Hardy) cap hit this year and next by a pretty significant amount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

I wouldnt use CJ's contract as a model though.  He was given more than he even expected probably to keep him from going to Atlanta plus Hurney loved doing blow and gave too much.  Regardless, a long term deal would lower his(Hardy) cap hit this year and next by a pretty significant amount.

 

The only reason I was using it as a model was to show how the deals are usually structured.  The specific numbers don't matter, my point is that the signing bonus is spread out throughout the deal and the base salaries are generally back loaded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peppers90 NC Community Regular

Peppers90 NC

Posted
Posted

The only reason I was using it as a model was to show how the deals are usually structured.  The specific numbers don't matter, my point is that the signing bonus is spread out throughout the deal and the base salaries are generally back loaded.

yea i am aware, thats why i was saying that earlier because it would certainly give us some relief the first two or three years in Hardy's case.  Instead of $13m, maybe bring that number down to $8m this year or somewhere in that neighborhood

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

yea i am aware, thats why i was saying that earlier because it would certainly give us some relief the first two or three years in Hardy's case.  Instead of $13m, maybe bring that number down to $8m this year or somewhere in that neighborhood

 

Gotcha, now I see that you were asking about the progress on a long-term deal.  Yeah, I have no clue.  Seems like nothing has happened or at least nothing has leaked on those happenings ever since he signed the tag.  That's not surprising given our excellent beat writers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...