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

Recommended Posts

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.

 

if anything his resurgence proves how much he kicked it on cruise control in carolina

 

the better he does, the more it looks like he was just phoning it in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if anything his resurgence proves how much he kicked it on cruise control in carolina

 

the better he does, the more it looks like he was just phoning it in

 

reasonable… although he definitely never had the advantage of playing across from a torrey smith while he was here with cam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if anything his resurgence proves how much he kicked it on cruise control in carolina

 

the better he does, the more it looks like he was just phoning it in

 

Oh, now Steve frickin' Smith dialed it in...

 

You do realize how outrageous that sounds...don't you...I hope.

 

I swear, I try to be civil and give people a certain amount of grace but to suggest Steve Smith did anything less than give his 100 percent on the field is just plain stupid.  There is no way to justify it.  It just shows that you and others like you that would dare suggest such idiocy have lost your senses on your personal sabbatical to cast negativity upon 89.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, now Steve frickin' Smith dialed it in...

 

You do realize how outrageous that sounds...don't you...I hope.

 

I swear, I try to be civil and give people a certain amount of grace but to suggest Steve Smith did anything less than give his 100 percent on the field is just plain stupid.  There is no way to justify it.  It just shows that you and others like you that would dare suggest such idiocy have lost your senses on your personal sabbatical to cast negativity upon 89.

 

or maybe we're just not overgrown children, cutting ourselves in a symbolic representation of the evil thing that gettlemen did to smitty while we listen to pop goth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

or maybe we're just not overgrown children, cutting ourselves in a symbolic representation of the evil thing that gettlemen did to smitty while we listen to pop goth

 

That would be more understandable and respectable than some of the reasoning that has been put forth in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be more understandable and respectable than some of the reasoning that has been put forth in this thread.

 

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

 

you can blame a lot on the scheme, and a lot on smitty's qb, but you can't blame either of them for what he does as an individual once he has the ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

you can blame a lot on the scheme, and a lot on smitty's qb, but you can't blame either of them for what he does as an individual once he has the ball

 

Dude, surely you have to be able to realize that all these dynamics play hand in hand.  They are easily separated on paper, but not so much on the field.  For example:  If Steve Smith had played with Peyton Manning or Tom Brady all those years as opposed to having to jump for balls, then perhaps he would have more YAC than he does. Moreover, it stands to reason that when you don't have guys doubling and tripling you, you have more space to run and move. It's not rocket science. 

 

I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...