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!

     

Final Panther cuts 8-30-2014

Jmac

By Jmac,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

rippadonn Grand Master

rippadonn

Posted
Posted

I will say this, if the TE corps increases its production over last year and Benjamin eclipses Smitty's stats from last year, we have to say we have improved.

I'd also add that if Philly Brown can channel Teddy Ginn this group could be very dangerous from years to come. Looking at Benjamin now, how many teams just passed on a #1 receiver? Dummies

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mol3m4n Mentor

Mol3m4n

Posted
Posted

Yeah, if we don't add any help at WR, which I anticipate, I'm really hoping that Dickson and Williams make the difference.

I expect KB to have an awesome year, but it just irritates me when the FO let Smitty go when he still could've helped us AND then completely neglected the position outside of KB. Yes, I know we signed Avant and Cotch, but to me, those are the equivalent of NBA teams signing 40-year old vets to show the kids how to be a pro. Not great football moves, IMO.

BUT, I digress... back to the cuts, lol.

Disagree.

That is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beastson Newbie

beastson

Posted
Posted

No I mean as a returner. Can you confidently put him out there late in the fourth quarter of a one score game to return a punt?

 

Return one? He hasn't shown any explosiveness no. He needs to worry about catching before he thinks about what he's going to do next with the ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MV%doe Newbie

MV%doe

Posted
Posted

King lacked STs, he was a only a 4/5 WR. He still could be placed on PS, with so many new WRs and FAs, its a fairly good shot. Both brown and bersin play STs. I've seen bersin on coverage team for awhile. King is too light for most STs unless he can return..... which isn't him.

Scott just a OG, I believe the rookie craveman 2.0 and the guy form pitt(coming off ach) can play more than just OG. Still he's a surprise to me. Gary williams can play OG too.

Look at brockel, if he only played TE, well he'd never would have been on the 53. He can play FB, all four ST phases, TE, slot etc. The more you can do, the more value you have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
methodtoll Proficient

methodtoll

Posted
Posted

King sucked. Move on people.

I wouldn't go that far. I think King is talented but he was over shadowed by Bersin and Brown.

King did make some plays when the ball was thrown his way. I just think he wasn't given to many opportunities during preseason.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ruff Newbie

Ruff

Posted
Posted

What if Smitty was the #2, or slot on this receiving corp? What could have been...

Lol, imagine this scenario. You wake up one morning. You go to Steve before the game. You tell him kelvin Benjamin, a rookie, is going to be targeted more than him and Steve is now officially a #2.

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      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
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      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.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      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...