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 interested in DeSean Jackson for the right price...


Ja  Rhule

Recommended Posts

Where will we be getting this cap space to afford Jackson?

Restructure, convert to signing bonus and delay until the cap is in better shape in another year or two. His cap hit this season could be pretty minimal.

Sent from the Carolina Huddle App

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Restructure, convert to signing bonus and delay until the cap is in better shape in another year or two. His cap hit this season could be pretty minimal.

Sent from the Carolina Huddle App

 

We still have to work something out with Cam Newton. Greg Hardy too, unless we are just going to let him walk next year. Everybody wants to talk about these contracts from Hurney that Gettleman is having to deal with, but it's okay for us to kick the can down the road for Jackson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We still have to work something out with Cam Newton. Greg Hardy too, unless we are just going to let him walk next year. Everybody wants to talk about these contracts from Hurney that Gettleman is having to deal with, but it's okay for us to kick the can down the road for Jackson?

A young number one wr vs. Williams/Stewart's contracts

Pick your poison

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. But it wasn't just Fua as the other d-lineman that year, oh no. They went back to back. It was hot.

But if I remember right, Fua was compesatory (bottom of the 3rd) and Fua was the first of the 4th. So we csn't have that much fun at the expense of the third round. . . Until you bring up Mike Seidman.

 

Fua and McClain were both considered reaches where they were drafted too, especially Fua.  There was a run on DTs and Hurney just panicked.  Fua was taken at #97 and the next DT didn't go off the board until #184.  In retrospect, that was just a terrible class of DTs.  Not a single Pro Bowler out of the bunch and beyond the top two selections (Fairly and Liuget) there isn't a decent starter among them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point is if Gettleman kicks the can for Djack it's not the equivalent of Hurney's disastrous deals.

 

Depends on how things would look in the next few years when we would eventually have to start paying for it. Which is a matter of when not if.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...