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!

     

Bene the starting nickel


Jmac

Recommended Posts

This is perfect. Let Bene start, and then right about time he hits his rookie wall, Godfrey should be 100% from his achilles. I think back to how bad Beason was early last season and how much improved he was on the Giants, and it makes me feel confident in Godfrey being a player for us this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is perfect. Let Bene start, and then right about time he hits his rookie wall, Godfrey should be 100% from his achilles. I think back to how bad Beason was early last season and how much improved he was on the Giants, and it makes me feel confident in Godfrey being a player for us this year.

I honestly don't have much faith in Godfrey even when he is 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is perfect. Let Bene start, and then right about time he hits his rookie wall, Godfrey should be 100% from his achilles. I think back to how bad Beason was early last season and how much improved he was on the Giants, and it makes me feel confident in Godfrey being a player for us this year.

 

 

 

 

Last year wasn't Beason's first year back from his achilles injury. It was '12.

 

Last year he was recovering from knee surgery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bene is gonna be a beast. best ball hog out of the draft. he's gonna do what Godfrey never did, cause alot of turnovers. pumped!

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

If I remember correctly Godfrey was pretty good at causing forced fumbles aka turnovers

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP
    • When we drafted Luke, we already had Cam, Smith, Olsen, Stewart, Deangleo, Gross, Kalil, CJ, Hardy, Beason, TD, Gamble (and maybe more I'm forgetting), we had a lot of great pieces in place. Going pure BPA for a player with Luke's potential when the LB you already have is different when you already have all those pieces in place.  Our OL right now is probably in a better shape than that team and our RBs and TE have potential compared to proven vets back then, but after that, the 2012 roster was in a far better shape than we are right now. We need a #1 WR, DEs, LBs, DBs, C, and depending who you ask a QB.  Going BPA at pick #5 when that player is a DT and your current best player on either side of the ball is a DT, seems irresponsible. If he's the only player they like that high left, then you trade back and go with position of more need at a slot that makes sense for the player while adding other picks.  If you trade back and he falls because other teams don't need/want a DT, then you consider him at that point because of the value.    
    • This sounds like the same back and forth when we drafted a LB when we already had a LB or as mentioned prior back to back DLs. I want the BPA, if it is another DT so be it. (No not a kicker/punter for those people that think they are funny))
×
×
  • Create New...