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

Zaximus Veteran

Zaximus

Posted
Posted

To be fair, I'm still waiting for some news to come out about a physical issue or some off-field issue going on.    It just doesn't make sense otherwise.

And if it's off-field stuff, that may lead more evidence to taking so many CB's in the draft.  But we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nick_81 Newbie

Nick_81

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, csx said:

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.

Never said anyone cared about his dead cap.  He was only here to earn a big payday, and everyone knew it.  He knew we needed corners, and he's seen what's happened with multiple guys after playing in our secondary the past few years.  I don't blame him, because it's a good move for him.  Apparently the FO saw enough out of the rookies, who by all accounts poured everything they had into this rookie camp, and decided to stick with them.  They want guys who are all-in for the team.  Maybe they just felt Boykin was just all-in for himself?  Who knows...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CatMan72 Enthusiast

CatMan72

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Jeremy Igo said:

Has more to do with how good Sanchez looked, imo. 

Yeah, this tells me we must have REALLY liked what we saw this past weekend... feel bad for Boykin but when we drafted 3 players at his position in the first 5 rounds he must have seen this coming. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Growl Veteran

Growl

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Sam Mills Fan said:

How do you guys feel about Bene? We're putting a lot into him as our undisputed #1 corner in 2016, but I thought he was mediocre last year. Not bad, not great, just a very average cornerback.

I was literally in the middle of watching him get roughed up in the first half of the green bay game when I decided to switch over to the huddle and see this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
Posted

Obviously we don't know what Gettleman's planning.... Maybe this will make some obvious sense soon.  But for now it is pretty shocking.

It's kind of exciting to see Dave take big risks like this though.  We're gonna either love him for this or hate him for this... ("this" being letting both Josh & Boykin go and really going all in with these new draftees to rebuild the secondary).

Given DG's track record, his willingness to not just do what's expected and to do stuff this bold, that's not "safe," and is going to have people screaming at him.... I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.

Where's the popcorn?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jdpanther5 Newbie

jdpanther5

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Zaximus said:

Gettleman getting a bit full of himself.

I like how we went from letting old vets get too much playing time to just forgetting about NFL experience altogether lol.

The vet purge is a little concerning.

Cotchery, Dwan, Allen, Harper, Tillman, Finnegan...none of those guys are huge losses from a talent standpoint, but the team has gotten a lot more inexperienced this off-season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Growl Veteran

Growl

Posted
Posted
Just now, CatMan72 said:

Yeah, this tells me we must have REALLY liked what we saw this past weekend... feel bad for Boykin but when we drafted 3 players at his position in the first 5 rounds he must have seen this coming. 

There is no way anybody saw one of the league's better nickel corners getting cut because of three hours worth of non contact drills for three corners who have never played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, jdpanther5 said:

The vet purge is a little concerning.

Cotchery, Dwan, Allen, Harper, Tillman, Finnegan...none of those guys are huge losses from a talent standpoint, but the team has gotten a lot more inexperienced this off-season.

And Ed Dickson appears to be squarely in the crosshairs given all these TEs we're signing....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Khaki Lackey Mentor

Khaki Lackey

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, KB_fan said:

Obviously we don't know what Gettleman's planning.... Maybe this will make some obvious sense soon.  But for now it is pretty shocking.

It's kind of exciting to see Dave take big risks like this though.  We're gonna either love him for this or hate him for this... ("this" being letting both Josh & Boykin go and really going all in with these new draftees to rebuild the secondary).

Given DG's track record, his willingness to not just do what's expected and to do stuff this bold, that's not "safe," and is going to have people screaming at him.... I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.

Where's the popcorn?

 

Yeah. I see what he's doing. This is a perplexing move, though. It just seems like a bit too much too soon. In Dave I trust, I guess. 

Best part is, we could win 15 games and people will still be able to say, "See! I told you we would take a step back!"

 

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...