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!

     

Smitty may be even more pissed than we thought (Panthers related)

RelaxImaPro

By RelaxImaPro,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Porn Shop Clerk Enthusiast

Porn Shop Clerk

Posted
Posted

There you go again.  What the hell does that mean?  Are you suggesting that Steve Smith hasn't mattered since the early 2000s?  What are you talking about?

 

the one thing that has made smitty elite above all others is his YAC.   his YAC has always been historical and is a true indicator of his decline.  2005 was an amazing year for smitty.   2011 showed a resurgence.  the rest of the chart shows a steady decline

 

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/players/25640/steve-smith-sr/#YAC%20per%20Reception$GameType=279588574&SeasonMax=9999&SeasonMin=1990

 

but you'll notice, after he got cut, it skyrockets.   we'll see if he can maintain that level of play.   if he does, he needs to thank gettleman for lighting a fire under his ass.

 

oh, but after 2008, you'll notice the chart takes a dive, other than the anomaly in 2011

 

i know. stats.   they're for pencil pushing geeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
top dawg Grand Master

top dawg

Posted
Posted

Ok this decade then.

 

What about this decade?  I hope that you are being "funny".  

 

If you are suggesting that Steve Smith hasn't mattered this decade, then that should say more about you and/or the insufficiency of the FO more than anything else.

 

If you ask any Ravens fan whether Steve Smith has mattered the last couple of games, you already know the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Car123 Proficient

Car123

Posted
Posted

are you proud of claiming  thatsteve smith leading the league in receiving yards when he's gotten a game more of stats than anyone else is anything resembling a meaningful remark?

 

Before the season If I said Smith would be leading the league in rec yards at this point (Yes I know he has played one more game than most receivers) you would laugh. You probably thought Smith would avg 30 yards per game for the Ravens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cpt slay a ho Mentor

Cpt slay a ho

Posted
Posted

Put it this way until we find out whether smith was released due to him personally telling DG he didn't want to take a pay cut or restructure........everything else is speculation

 

if he didn't want to do that then yes he should have been released in a classy manner

 

everything else about being old, bad teammate, wouldn't take a lesser role, wanting cam to lead ect is pure bi-lo brand bologna IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhillyB Grand Master

PhillyB

Posted
Posted

Before the season If I said Smith would be leading the league in rec yards at this point (Yes I know he has played one more game than most receivers) you would laugh. You probably thought Smith would avg 30 yards per game for the Ravens.

 

he's done better than i expected, but given his performance as a whole measured with the bulk of his yards (that deep play against the bengals) it's reasonable to assume he'll regress to the mean. i'd like a larger sample size (say four games) before declaring that his body of work is clearly superior to anything any of us expected.

 

…but even if he does continue to excel, i won't be entirely surprised. as others have echoed, smith's career got a serious rejuvenation by going up there. getting cut enlarged a chip on his shoulder that seems may have been gone, or less important. it's worked for him, it's worked for the ravens, and so far it appears to have worked for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

are you proud of claiming thatsteve smith leading the league in receiving yards when he's gotten a game more of stats than anyone else is anything resembling a meaningful remark?

Said elsewhere Smith looking good early in the season wouldn't shock me.

If he's still performing above expectations come week eight to week ten or so, then I'll be impressed.

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...