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!

     

Panthers Release Boykin

jdpanther5

By jdpanther5,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

csx Grand Master

csx

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Nick_81 said:

I was very surprised at first, but I can see why this happened.  They knew Boykin was just here to try to earn a payday.  They must have really like what they saw in the rookies to, damn.  I'm pretty excited to be honest.

Who cares about $80,000 in dead cap, that's couch change. What we should care about is not having a player of his caliber with all these rookies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
Posted
Just now, Kakarot said:

I guess Coleman and Bene are the leaders of that secondary. They've got quite a few youngsters to look after and mentor. 

Yes, I was just starting to pull together a table showing the playing experience of our DBs.... I'll have it soon.   But this is a pretty ballsy move by DG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cary Kollins Experienced

Cary Kollins

Posted
Posted

What the fugs ever. Boykin was signed when there was great uncertainty in the secondary.

 

Then the draft came and a few bupbupbups later there are three shiny new players in the secondary.

Ride or die.

At least now Boykin has plenty of time to sign to another team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EightyNine Newbie

EightyNine

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Zaximus said:

If you're a vet looking for a new team, this looks really bad for us as a team.  He came here pretty cheap, wouldn't surprise me if he took less to come here than somewhere else, then gets cut after all the FA stuff has slowed down.

I just don't understand this, unless some more info comes out, but I'm not sure how you take some rookie(s) over a guy with experience.

Maybe it looks bad, but thats not a reason to keep him.

No need for anyone to be that upset over a guy who cant stay on a roster for one reason or the other.  I think people are upset because this guy got over hyped, and now people think we lost a good player.  The fact that he was cheap should make you guys feel even better.  It's not like we wanted him but decided to cut him because we wanted the extra money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sam Mills Fan Newbie

Sam Mills Fan

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

neat, i have two favorites:

 

You got my ass. I wanna say it's a little disturbing when I think about how long it must have taken you to find those threads, but you got me. I can be reactionary. Thankfully I haven't made a thread like that in 3 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PanthersBigD Newbie

PanthersBigD

Posted
Posted

Boykin signed a one year deal that was basically a prove-it deal to advertise his skills to other teams for a pay day. We were willing to enter into a mutually beneficial relationship with him because we needed secondary help...until the draft. We just drafted three DBs who apparently look very promising. So, we released a guy that would leech playing time from our rookies, who the coaching staff want to see on the field ASAP. Now he has a chance to catch on with another team that needs help at DB instead of riding the bench or creating the problem of who to put on the field. 

If he's riding the bench behind one of our rookies, or splitting time with them, that's not a really great way to highlight his skill set for another team. This works out better for everyone. Just my opinion. 

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...