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!

     

Karlos Williams


Eazy-E

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Carolina Cajun said:

No, Karlos won't help us.  Now marcel reece is a guy I want on our roster yesterday.  We NEED a lead blocker.

Why do we need a lead blocker when we rarely ever use a lead blocker.  Even before Tolbert got unbearable to watch he rarely was a lead blocker.

what we need is another Stewart

you could argue in Tolbert's prime he was in the ballpark to what a healthy Stewart is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted Alfred Morris, and to me it made a lot of sense to me.

He isn't a headcase, has always been highly productive and criminally underrated, plus he came at a very cheap price. 

With Stews injury history, as well as the other factors, I felt like Morris was a logical and perfect fit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Bartin said:

Yes I remember reading the "sympathy pain" article. I didn't even have to click the link to know which article this is.

I truly think passing up on a chance to sign Alfred Morris was a major mistake.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Eazy-E said:

 

His suspension is over and he is probably the most talented free agent running back. Is he worth looking into? Stewart's return is unknown and our running attack is non existent right now. If Williams worked out he is young and potentially be our future feature back. Can't deny what he did his rookie season.

 

Gotta throw Forsett out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, cardiackat88. said:

Yes I remember reading the "sympathy pain" article. I didn't even have to click the link to know which article this is.

I truly think passing up on a chance to sign Alfred Morris was a major mistake.

 

Alfred Morris signed with Dallas when it looked like he had a good chance to be the starter.

He was never going to sign with a team where it would have been known coming in that he was going to be the backup.  Your mistaken assumption is that he would have given Carolina even a second thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...