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

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I wouldn't like to have a weapon like him here for Cam.

 

But looking down the line, it's going to be Jackson over someone else. Don't forget Luke has a contract coming up too.

 

I'd trade a 3rd for Djax....even if we only keep him a year.  If he produces and earns a big contract we'll cross that bridge when we get there.  If he under performs then he'll have to sign a much more reasonable contract if we choose to resign him.  Either way....everything this off season looks like genius if we land him.  We can still draft a receiver early this year if Jackson doesn't re up his contract with us we'll have some receivers ready to step up.

 

Plus this put us in a good position to take either a T, or a WR in the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting good value for Desean Jackson in a trade might be difficult for the Philadelphia Eagles. The problem is not Jackson's ability. Many agree that the wide receiver's talent is significant. But some front-office men are privately saying they would be hesitant to give up too much for Jackson because they are concerned about his immaturity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason the Panthers could maybe pull off having DJax's contract the next few years is 1) The cap, by estimates, will continue to increase a good amount each year going forward, and 2) the Panthers have a good amount of dead cap space dropping off during those years as well, and 3) Cam and him seem to be pretty tight and that matters more than people realize. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...