MHS831

Or Hill, or Byrd. Gonna be a battle.

When you sit down and put an honest, objective mind to this, who has more upside-- Garrett or Brown? I think the Panthers keep 5 WRs, but there is something to consider--I doubt we keep Teddy Williams, who was only a special teams player. If you think of Ginn that way, can we work Garrett onto the roster? Benjamin (Lock) Funchess (Lock) Ginn (Lock) Brown (Lock) Garrett Byrd Hill Norwood Hamilton Bersin Stoshak Note: Byrd and Stoshak are PS eligible, and I am guessing one or both will go to the PS unless they have a remarkable or underwhelming preseason. The addition of Garrett decreases the chances for Hill and Norwood, imo, because I think Garrett might be better.

He is humble, confident, and seems determined. Imagine the stories that will be written about him when he becomes a productive NFL WR. I liked the "Yes Sir" answer. I am old school in terms of manners. It tells me that he was brought up well.

I think Dickson is gone. His Super Bowl blocking was a joke. I know he got a contract last year, but we get half back if we cut him.

NICKNAME TIME!!!!! But first, a quiz: What kind of surface do the Panthers play on? ........................ What kind of grass?............................. 3 corners create a .................................. KEY: 1. grass 2. Bermuda 3. Triangle Therefore, the 2016 rookie CBs should be called the Bermuda Triangle. Thank you.

I agree, and if you want to know how accurate these sites actually are, then take a look at them after the draft. It is about perspective too. Bradberry was not a 4th rounder we took in the second, he was a second rounder these sites predicted would be taken in the 4th--they were wrong, not the Panthers. And they cant possibly know fits--when I saw some sites projecting Bullard to us as a DE, I realized that they know nothing. Michelin "Firestalker" 165, blah blah may be the best tire for a mid-sized SUV, but not for a Honda Accord. Yet these sites are rating the tires without knowing what kind of vehicle they are for--crazy, really.

They are--to me, there were 2 elite CBs and there are about 12 in the "above average category, depending on what you need. We need a starter, but I think it is also a time to maybe grab depth too. I think we are going to draft either a WR, DE, or SS in the second, a CB in the third--based on where I expect value to be. Today is going to be the fun day....

The Human Rollie Pollie?

I know it seems like a reach, but Harlan Miller could be the pick. Jeremy Cash SS is also a possibility. If we trade up, a WR like Michael Thomas or Sterling Shepherd could be the reason.

Even when Igo is right, he is 75% wrong.

Quiet names nobody is talking much about: Cash, SS Calhoun, DE Nassib DE

" a total of 32 compensatory picks are awarded to teams that have lost more or better compensatory free agents than they signed in the previous year ." That threw me---you are probably right about value. The process is not clear, but the way this reads and one writer interpreted this) it appears to begin with the number of players lost to other teams vs the number gained from other teams. You could be right, but the formula is confusing and there are mixed messages being sent out. My thing is this--who is out there? We have the veteran CBs we need (Boykin, Bene, McClain) and really only need a rookie CB to add to the mix. Maybe 2 rookies.

Not sure if this has been stated yet, but I KNOW we are probably will not bring in another free agent this year. If we do, we lose a 3rd round comp pick. We lost 2 (Nortman and Valasco) and we gained 2 (Boykin and Gradkowski) before we lost Norman. So, if we sign another free agent--probably a marginal, old player, we lose the third rounder. So we ain't grabbin nobody. We will address the need by drafting a cb or 2.

I am a bit surprised Germaine Ifedi was not on the list--I think I would remove the TE and insert the LT candidate. Hunter Henry is nice and I would like him in the second, but we have not really visited with him (to the best of my knowledge-don't we always bring in the first rounder at some point?)

I see this, and I have had the same thoughts. Then I see stats like the Panthers led the league in dropped pass yardage, I do not see a Steve Smith--a player who can take any pass to the house at any given time. That is why I would love for Byrd to develop or to have a Shepherd. Then I consider that Funchess is getting a year older, KB is coming back, and the WR farm is going to produce 1 more player for us. I also consider the fact that Ginn was our #1 WR--Ted Ginn---on a 15-1 team. Kinda blows your mind.

Would love Shepherd--thought for sure you would mention Boyd. Cooper would be a great fit here with Funchess and KB--he will fail if a team tries to make him a 1 or 2, imo.

http://www.axonpotential.com/athletes-and-age-of-peak-performance/ This gives you some idea why you need to be cautious about signing a 28-year old athlete to a long-term deal. Marty did the same thing with D. Williams and rarely do you get your money's worth. Norman is peaking---and he wants the Panthers to bet that he will play at the highest level for 3-5 more seasons. He is probably at his ceiling, and wants to be paid as one of the best for a longer period of time than he has been one of the best. Note in the link that speed athletes (athletes that use speed to compete) across many sports start sloping downward at the same age--27. Most athletes that play into their 30s do so by making up for the waning physical prowess with veteran intelligence. Does Norman have the same intelligence as a Darren Woodson? Jerry Rice? even a Peanut Tillman? I do not see it, but I do not know. I can assure you that Gettlemen has an idea.

I could not agree more, but his strategy is a gamble. If he holds out, getting a better deal next year is highly improbable and he would actually lose millions.

Direct responses to your discourse above in bold: Your last point is the most valid, but reconstructing deals prolongs the inevitable and never saves the team money--it usually costs the team more. I would give him top 5 money--but guarantee less than 50% and make it front loaded. Norman probably wants top dollar, guaranteed at 60% or higher. Gettlemen is not stupid, and he is not going to sell the farm for a position that, in the current system, can be replaced. It is about asset allocation. Fundamentally, we will pay for certain positions, but will not be held hostage by a CB. I want him re-signed, but an athlete that relies on speed peaks at 27. Norman will be 28. He is playing great right now, but it is not predicting the future to realize that his athleticism will diminish. That is certain. No crystal ball needed. No psychic reading. It happens to every single athlete. All of them. So YOU are predicting that it will not happen to him in the next 4 years--that he will defy the odds like a very few exceptions have. THAT is predicting the future. Would you put $50 million on the fact that his skills will not diminish and he will not be worse in 3-4 years than he is now? I would not. He wants 4 years of top $$$. Again, trust Gettlemen. He is not going to regret a deal in 2018 he made in 2016.

Why do you have to start every post with a smartass, misinformed comment? I can see the future---we all get older. Not a newsflash. Damn, son. NOT giving him a deal based on the majority of CBs over 30 is playing the odds--not predicting the future. Giving him a deal at top dollar because a few elite CBs have played into their 30s IS predicting the future--wise up.

Our defense, by design, needs studs up front. If we have to pay $13m per season for a CB, we are not doing it right up front. It is not about talent, it is about resource allocation. You would sign Norman long term and let Short or KK walk? Not me. Before KK and Short, when was the last time we had a decent DT? Jenkins? He was drafted before Hurney was here. We are where we are because of our stout front 4 supported by some of the best LBs in football. Norman is the beneficiary of that. I see your point, but paying an elite player on the brink of decline top dollars for 4 years or so is not what I would do.

One more thought Are there people on this board who think a long-term (4 years) deal would be a mistake? I feel that he is peaking--and he wants elite money for 4 years--I am guessing around $55 million. If we can get one year--perhaps his best year at 28---and turn him loose at age 29, we can say we would not be paying top dollar for a 32-33 year old CB. Just a thought, but this is a business. We never have paid a premium for CBs--we are invested in the front 7. I hate to lose him, but if he wants to get filthy rich, he may be talking to the wrong GM Finally, if you look at Norman's rise to prominence, it is directly related to the rise in prominence of the DL. Coincidence? Not saying he is not great, but I am saying he could not be as elite as he thinks he is..

Have not read the entire thread, so excuse me if this obvious statement has been stated and repeated-- Gettlemen needs to sign a CB in free agency and draft one. Leverage, but we will need 2 anyway. That sounded better in my head.

There were games where the Panthers let off the gas this season. Seattle is not the team to do that with--I would say another TD will put this one out of reach (which would put Carolina up 7 scores) One TD, Shula.

Yep. Thankful that Minnesota is between domes.