Jeremy Cash

[t96]

10 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Honestly, you have praised Philly Brown to the detriment of Byrd. Even @Jeremy Igo had to call you on this last year, when we both pointed out that Byrd had arguably done better than Philly in the preseason of 2015. I think that you used the words "done nothing," or something to that effect. So, excuse me if I don't take your words "inferior player" as gospel, especially in light of all the opportunities that Philly was given.

Philly has produced at the highest level in the most important game of the season against a historically great defense, going up against arguably the best cover corner in the league right now in Talib. Hell, if Philly doesn't go out with a concussion we may have had a shot at winning that game in the 2nd half, as he was our only threat on offense that game. And the Cardinals game as well. Should Philly be starting? Ideally no as he is somewhat inconsistent and clearly physically pretty limited but to say that he hasn't earned his role and opportunities is absurd and asinine. (And no, it's not just those two playoff games, he was solid all of 2015 in his role as well and has shown he can produce in real games when it matters) Philly was horrible the 2015 preseason so I think any WR could've looked better than him then. It's the preseason. Not really a great indicator. Think about how many players we've had light up the preseason only to be truly horrible in actual games. I don't think you've seen enough from these players to have any reasonable argument against Rivera here.

 

And I'd like to ask again, do you think the New York Giants are good at evaluating WR talent?

[top dawg]

15 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

Philly has produced at the highest level in the most important game of the season against a historically great defense, going up against arguably the best cover corner in the league right now in Talib. Hell, if Philly doesn't go out with a concussion we may have had a shot at winning that game in the 2nd half, as he was our only threat on offense that game. And the Cardinals game as well. Should Philly be starting? Ideally no as he is somewhat inconsistent and clearly physically pretty limited but to say that he hasn't earned his role and opportunities is absurd and asinine. (And no, it's not just those two playoff games, he was solid all of 2015 in his role as well and has shown he can produce in real games when it matters) Philly was horrible the 2015 preseason so I think any WR could've looked better than him then. It's the preseason. Not really a great indicator. Think about how many players we've had light up the preseason only to be truly horrible in actual games. I don't think you've seen enough from these players to have any reasonable argument against Rivera here.

 

And I'd like to ask again, do you think the New York Giants are good at evaluating WR talent?

 

Overvaluing Philly is part of the reason we're in the position of needing to draft a receiver (hopefully two) in the first place. We need to get serious about our offensive "evolution," and sticking with the status quo is unacceptable.

 

Don't remember you asking, but as far as the Giants are concerned, it's pretty hard to argue that they haven't had some good talent over the years (even though I know that a couple haven't quite worked out as planned). If they get their running game fixed, they may make a little more noise.

 

 

[t96]

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

 

Overvaluing Philly is part of the reason we're in the position of needing to draft a receiver (hopefully two) in the first place. We need to get serious about our offensive "evolution," and sticking with the status quo is unacceptable.

 

Don't remember you asking, but as far as the Giants are concerned, it's pretty hard to argue that they haven't had some good talent over the years (even though I know that a couple haven't quite worked out as planned). If they get their running game fixed, they may make a little more noise.

 

 

Who says anybody is overvaluing Philly? You don't think he's completely fine as a 3rd/4th receiver? Overvaluing Ginn maybe as him and KB get the most snaps but Philly is completely solid as a 3rd WR. And I don't necessarily agree with the notion that we need to draft any WRs. Of course you always want to improve every single position on the team. I'd love to have 4 top 30 WRs and move Philly into the #5 role or be so good at the position that we would cut him. But that just isn't realistic at all. If the draft falls that way and we pick up talent at WR, then great. But if not I'm not really worried about the WR group. There are other more urgent and important positions that need help. I know we've had this back and forth a lot dawg, but it seems to me like you're more focused on the WR group than the team as a whole. How many teams win Super Bowls with an elite WR group? I think WR group is pretty low level of importance compared to other position groups and I think DG and much of the league agree. Sure it'd be great to have elite WRs for Cam but it shouldn't be the utmost priority, in my opinion, if we're trying to win a Super Bowl.

There are position groups I favor as well. Just so happens one of them we're stacked at (LB) so I'm not screaming to add talent there (maybe I would be if we didn't have Luke and TD but we do...). But the other is DE which we have a lot of problems with right now. I really badly would like to upgrade that position and get back to the days of prime Hardy and CJ in '13 but I realize that in team building you can't focus on just certain positions. We had a Super Bowl caliber team in '15 with weak DE play much of the year and upgrading it is not what would've won the game against Denver. I would love to see a top DE taken at 8 or a guy like JPP signed but I'm not sure that's what's best for the team's success. Taking someone like Fournette or Adams may be much better than taking the 3rd or 4th DE. If that's the case and we improve the team in other areas and DE remains a weakness then that just is what it is and may be best for the team winning, which is ultimately what I want to see. My ideal style of ball is controlling the clock through the run game and having a dominant defense like in 2013, so if we build a team like that and win a Super Bowl then I'm thrilled. But if we're winning with a team like in 2015 by throwing the ball and outscoring teams most weeks then I'm happier about that. The way it comes across in your posts is that you'd rather see less success with better WRs than a middle of the pack WR group but a better team. I'm sure that's not your thinking (you just want to win) but that's kind of how it comes across. Similar to some other posters who seem to be pure Cam fans and want to see him throw 55 TDs every year and 5000 yards but don't care as much if the team wins. Not saying that's you at all but you're definitely more passionate about the WR position. I think it's an interesting discussion though and worth having. I don't know that we have all that different opinions either, just looking at it slightly different.

 

It was a response to a post of yours about letting Willie Snead slip through our hands right after my other post you responded to. I think the Giants are pretty damn good with the WR group compared to the rest of the league, and have been for the past several years with a lot of players. Before we had Snead the Giants worked him out and didn't sign him and for about a month he was unsigned before we put him on our practice squad. Every team had the opportunity to sign him during that month and nobody did, and I'm positive nearly every team was aware of him and had looked into him to some degree. After we cut him the Saints had him on the practice squad for a month. At that time they thought so little of him that they had him sitting there ready for any team to just take. Point is that these types of players who build there way up from nothing to being solid contributors or better don't show it from the start or with every team they're with. You cannot blame anybody in the Panthers organization for "letting him slip through our hands." Every single team has had multiple players that went on to be insanely good elsewhere. Remmers was on like 6 different teams and came here and turned into a solid starter for a while and now a very quality swing tackle for depth, who can play both left and right. No he's not elite but he's not much worse than Snead who benefits a lot from Brees and that offense. Look at Ginn as well. Should every other team be criticized for letting him slip through their hands after seeing his success here in '15 and to some degree this year? 

 

Now I'm not saying Rivera and DG don't have their flaws or that their flaws aren't outweighing their strengths. I just think reasons you've given for criticism (such as not giving Byrd an opportunity, letting Snead go, DG not adding other WR talent, etc.) aren't really that fair when you consider all the factors, many of which people like you and me have absolutely zero clue about (like what goes on in practice and the actual nuances of positions and the x's and o's). We're fans not advanced football minds. Rivera and DG are and are in their jobs for a reason so I trust them to know a lot more than the likes of you and me. 

[top dawg]

47 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

Who says anybody is overvaluing Philly? You don't think he's completely fine as a 3rd/4th receiver? Overvaluing Ginn maybe as him and KB get the most snaps but Philly is completely solid as a 3rd WR. And I don't necessarily agree with the notion that we need to draft any WRs. Of course you always want to improve every single position on the team. I'd love to have 4 top 30 WRs and move Philly into the #5 role or be so good at the position that we would cut him. But that just isn't realistic at all. If the draft falls that way and we pick up talent at WR, then great. But if not I'm not really worried about the WR group. There are other more urgent and important positions that need help. I know we've had this back and forth a lot dawg, but it seems to me like you're more focused on the WR group than the team as a whole. How many teams win Super Bowls with an elite WR group? I think WR group is pretty low level of importance compared to other position groups and I think DG and much of the league agree. Sure it'd be great to have elite WRs for Cam but it shouldn't be the utmost priority, in my opinion, if we're trying to win a Super Bowl.

There are position groups I favor as well. Just so happens one of them we're stacked at (LB) so I'm not screaming to add talent there (maybe I would be if we didn't have Luke and TD but we do...). But the other is DE which we have a lot of problems with right now. I really badly would like to upgrade that position and get back to the days of prime Hardy and CJ in '13 but I realize that in team building you can't focus on just certain positions. We had a Super Bowl caliber team in '15 with weak DE play much of the year and upgrading it is not what would've won the game against Denver. I would love to see a top DE taken at 8 or a guy like JPP signed but I'm not sure that's what's best for the team's success. Taking someone like Fournette or Adams may be much better than taking the 3rd or 4th DE. If that's the case and we improve the team in other areas and DE remains a weakness then that just is what it is and may be best for the team winning, which is ultimately what I want to see. My ideal style of ball is controlling the clock through the run game and having a dominant defense like in 2013, so if we build a team like that and win a Super Bowl then I'm thrilled. But if we're winning with a team like in 2015 by throwing the ball and outscoring teams most weeks then I'm happier about that. The way it comes across in your posts is that you'd rather see less success with better WRs than a middle of the pack WR group but a better team. I'm sure that's not your thinking (you just want to win) but that's kind of how it comes across. Similar to some other posters who seem to be pure Cam fans and want to see him throw 55 TDs every year and 5000 yards but don't care as much if the team wins. Not saying that's you at all but you're definitely more passionate about the WR position. I think it's an interesting discussion though and worth having. I don't know that we have all that different opinions either, just looking at it slightly different. 

 

Quote

It was a response to a post of yours about letting Willie Snead slip through our hands right after my other post you responded to. I think the Giants are pretty damn good with the WR group compared to the rest of the league, and have been for the past several years with a lot of players. Before we had Snead the Giants worked him out and didn't sign him and for about a month he was unsigned before we put him on our practice squad. Every team had the opportunity to sign him during that month and nobody did, and I'm positive nearly every team was aware of him and had looked into him to some degree. After we cut him the Saints had him on the practice squad for a month. At that time they thought so little of him that they had him sitting there ready for any team to just take. Point is that these types of players who build there way up from nothing to being solid contributors or better don't show it from the start or with every team they're with. You cannot blame anybody in the Panthers organization for "letting him slip through our hands." Every single team has had multiple players that went on to be insanely good elsewhere. Remmers was on like 6 different teams and came here and turned into a solid starter for a while and now a very quality swing tackle for depth, who can play both left and right. No he's not elite but he's not much worse than Snead who benefits a lot from Brees and that offense. Look at Ginn as well. Should every other team be criticized for letting him slip through their hands after seeing his success here in '15 and to some degree this year? 

 

Now I'm not saying Rivera and DG don't have their flaws or that their flaws aren't outweighing their strengths. I just think reasons you've given for criticism (such as not giving Byrd an opportunity, letting Snead go, DG not adding other WR talent, etc.) aren't really that fair when you consider all the factors, many of which people like you and me have absolutely zero clue about (like what goes on in practice and the actual nuances of positions and the x's and o's). We're fans not advanced football minds. Rivera and DG are and are in their jobs for a reason so I trust them to know a lot more than the likes of you and me. 

I can appreciate your nuanced positions which may not be so different as mine, like you say, and perhaps I do tend to focus on wide receivers, but that doesn't mean that I don't have my fingers on the pulse on all the positions, as much as a fan can. The fact is, you need legit threats in at least three receiver spots if you're going to win a championship in the modern NFL. The way that the game has evolved into being so protective over receivers (and some QBs at least), it's just smart to keep the position---starters and depth---at an optimal level.  

As for Rivera and Gettleman, as everyone should know by now, I am (and have largely been) a supporter of both in regards to their overall body of work and what they've had to deal with, but everyone also knows I call it like I see it. I appreciate their professional position. That being said, they get no pass from me on the score (or lack thereof) of Snead, and I've already stated why. I can't speak to all the dynamics of the Giants, but from a hardcore Panthers' fans' perspective, I will say that we've half-assed it at the receiver position to our detriment for years. It is arguably worse than what we've done at LT, simply because it has gone on so much longer. 

As for this draft, the first time I spoke on our first round pick, it was in reference to how I thought Adams should be the guy. I've also said that if Fournette is all that and a bag of chips that I don't see how we pass on him. As for anyone else, it would depend on workouts and the combine. Of course it all depends upon free agency, but I've also mentioned Bolles, and, yes, Corey Davis. I am on board with G-man and his BPA philosophy, regardless if that's a receiver or not, but receiver is on my list of things to do.

Here is my to do list in order of priority:

1. LT (or even RT)

No explanation needed. If only Gettleman had acquired Veldheer like I wanted him to do.

2. Safety

Preferably a SS but I'll take a FS in order to get Boston off the field

3. TE 

Olsen is not getting any younger, plus a second TE should open up the offense and upgrade blocking

4. WR

We need another legitimate, consistent threat who DC's are forced to take seriously, and it would help everyone from Cam on down. The right addition(s) could be prolific.

5. DE

For all the talk of needing an edge rusher, we did pretty well last year.  Rivera said that CJ was his most consistent at the position (though many in the Huddle fail to appreciate that). CJ, assuming he is re-signed, and, Addison, if we re-sign him, should continue to play effective roles, and Ealy should only improve (as he did later on in the season). Horton is good depth, but we can always look for better. The rest of the line makes the D-line as a whole arguably better than our receiving corps. At worst, we can make some things work by blitzing LBs and DBs to get through another year.

6. RB

Actually I think that we could get by with what we have for another season, but with such a deep draft class, in theory we should be able to upgrade on the cheap.

7. CB 

A veteran corner (or two) could make a world of difference, but drafting upgrades is not an outlandish thought.

8. OG/C

Good depth is always welcome.

9. DT

Franchise Short if you can't extend him, and get Big Vern lots of time this season. With Star and Short, we're still stout. And, this time, don't cut Love, but extend him for a season or two.

10. LB

We should be good, and more than good if Klein is re-signed.

 

 

[donttreadonme]

3 minutes ago, top dawg said:

 

I can appreciate your nuanced positions which may not be so different as mine, like you say, and perhaps I do tend to focus on wide receivers, but that doesn't mean that I don't have my fingers on the pulse on all the positions, as much as a fan can. The fact is, you need legit threats in at least three receiver spots if you're going to win a championship in the modern NFL. The way that the game has evolved into being so protective over receivers (and some QBs at least), it's just smart to keep the position---starters and depth---at an optimal level.  

As for Rivera and Gettleman, as everyone should know by now, I am (and have largely been) a supporter of both in regards to their overall body of work and what they've had to deal with, but everyone also knows I call it like I see it. I appreciate their professional position. That being said, they get no pass from me on the score (or lack thereof) of Snead, and I've already stated why. I can't speak to all the dynamics of the Giants, but from a hardcore Panthers' fans' perspective, I will say that we've half-assed it at the receiver position to our detriment for years. It is arguably worse than what we've done at LT, simply because it has gone on so much longer. 

As for this draft, the first time I spoke on our first round pick, it was in reference to how I thought Adams should be the guy. I've also said that if Fournette is all that and a bag of chips that I don't see how we pass on him. As for anyone else, it would depend on workouts and the combine. Of course it all depends upon free agency, but I've also mentioned Bolles, and, yes, Corey Davis. I am on board with G-man and his BPA philosophy, regardless if that's a receiver or not, but receiver is on my list of things to do.

Here is my to do list in order of priority:

1. LT (or even RT)

No explanation needed. If only Gettleman had acquired Veldheer like I wanted him to do.

2. Safety

Preferably a SS but I'll take a FS in order to get Boston off the field

3. TE 

Olsen is not getting any younger, plus a second TE should open up the offense and upgrade blocking

4. WR

We need another legitimate, consistent threat who DC's are forced to take seriously, and it would help everyone from Cam on down. The right addition(s) could be prolific.

5. DE

For all the talk of needing an edge rusher, we did pretty well last year.  Rivera said that CJ was his most consistent at the position (though many in the Huddle fail to appreciate that). CJ, assuming he is re-signed, and, Addison, if we re-sign him, should continue to play effective roles, and Ealy should only improve (as he did later on in the season). Horton is good depth, but we can always look for better. The rest of the line makes the D-line as a whole arguably better than our receiving corps. At worst, we can make some things work by blitzing LBs and DBs to get through another year.

6. RB

Actually I think that we could get by with what we have for another season, but with such a deep draft class, in theory we should be able to upgrade on the cheap.

7. CB 

A veteran corner (or two) could make a world of difference, but drafting upgrades is not an outlandish thought.

8. OG/C

Good depth is always welcome.

9. DT

Franchise Short if you can't extend him, and get Big Vern lots of time this season. With Star and Short, we're still stout. And, this time, don't cut Love, but extend him for a season or two.

10. LB

We should be good, and more than good if Klein is re-signed.

 

 

Switch RB with WR.

[top dawg]

17 minutes ago, donttreadonme said:

Switch RB with WR.

I think that's a very reasonable position. I just believe that some people have a tendency to poo-poo the belief that "It's a passing league." Hell, it may be arguable, but even the most prolific backs catch an appreciable amount of passes these days.

I just think a prolific WR would do more for us this coming season to get us back to contention quicker.

 

[donttreadonme]

1 minute ago, top dawg said:

I think that's a very reasonable position. I just believe that some people have a tendency to poo-poo the belief that "It's a passing league." Hell, it may be arguable, but even the most prolific backs catch an appreciable amount of passes these days.

 

Yep.

I'm looking at the fact that stew can't stay healthy. Isn't getting any younger either. Not to mention, we have nothing behind him in terms of quality.

[t96]

4 minutes ago, top dawg said:

The fact is, you need legit threats in at least three receiver spots if you're going to win a championship in the modern NFL. The way that the game has evolved into being so protective over receivers (and some QBs at least), it's just smart to keep the position---starters and depth---at an optimal level.  

 

Here's where we may disagree, but I guess it depends on how one defines "legit threats." Does TE or receiving HB count? Did the Seahawks have 3 "legit threats" when they won it? Tate, Baldwin, who else? Anyone behind those two in my opinion was no more of a threat than Ginn, Funchess or even Philly. Kearse? Not really. Denver beat us with two as well. I'd consider Sanders and Thomas to be their only "legit threats" (but again, depends on how one defines this). Of course both of them are top 20 WRs so that is a very good starting duo. 

We have: Olsen, KB, Ginn, Funchess, Philly. I'd say those are our top 5 receiving options. Olsen and KB are definitely legit threats, I don't see how anyone could deny that by any definition. Ginn is obviously terribly inconsistent at catching it but in my mind he's a legit threat. And I still think Funch can be a solid threat as well. Philly is a role player who fits his role very well as a 4th or 5th option. 

In my opinion here I think the biggest problem with the WR group hasn't been the personnel but the way they are used in our offense. I don't like Shula's offense at all. It's horrible in my opinion. How can you expect the wide receivers to have success when they are running 3 second routes and Cam has 2 seconds before he's under pressure? Of course I just go by what I observe as well and it's certainly possible Shula can run an offense and the problem is the personnel but that's not how it appears to me.

 

Quote

Here is my to do list in order of priority:

1. LT (or even RT)

2. Safety

3. TE

4. WR

5. DE

6. RB

7. CB 

8. OG/C

9. DT

10. LB

I'd probably put it a little differently but I can understand your reasoning.

1. New OC and QB coach (not gonna happen but putting it here anyways, and Rivera's unabashed loyalty is his biggest flaw in my opinion, one that could get him fired eventually)

2. Safety (in a passing league right now I think this is most important to finish off building the core of our secondary with Bradberry and Worley set and hopefully to improve, Coleman solid at FS as a cheapish vet and then the cornerstone at SS if we could get Adams or even try to sign Berry. Hell the Seahawks won a Super Bowl largely because of dominant safety and secondary play)

3. DE (tempted to put this higher but for some reason I still have a feeling Ealy's going to finally "get it." Naturally it's the final year of his rookie deal so he'd go from inconsistent first 3 years to 1 dominant year then massive payday, similar to Josh. If we don't retain Addison and/or CJ this moves up to 2 in my opinion)

4. LT (Depends on Oher but I think the line is good enough with Remmers and Williams if we had an OC who could run the offense better. Still would love to upgrade though)

5. TE (Need Greg's heir apparent and #2 option right now. Wouldn't be totally against Howard at 8. Not many options in FA)

6. RB (if Stew is cut this moves up, and it and TE include the need for a FB/H-back type position who can block)

7. C (Larsen has been solid but still think we need Kalil's eventual replacement)

8. WR (Confident in the group but would like an upgrade if it shows itself for reasonable value)

9. DT (If we retain KK long term this'll go down to second least important, but if not then we will still need to fill an important spot in the rotation. Confident in Star and Butler as starters if no KK, if extended those 3 will dominate)

10. CB (Honestly think this group is set on the outside, but could certainly use some more depth. LJ resigned and we're good at nickel too, and I wouldn't give up on Sanchez yet, at least as nickel depth)

11. OG (Set in stone starters who are iron men. Depth is decent.)

12. LB (Obviously best position group on the team, starters and depth wise. Arguably the best position group of any team in the entire league.)

[panthers55]

4 hours ago, top dawg said:

Not really. My initial opinion still stands. I wasn't the first person to bring up Barnidge, in this thread, or in the Huddle, though I still find it incredulous that guru Gettleman didn't keep the guy, and Rivera (and your OC)didn't legitimately use Barnidge in the normal flow of the offense. 

My contention was originally and mainly about Rivera and Byrd, and I stand by it. I have said it before, if you are ostensibly developing guys to play, let them play, especially when the guys in front of them are playing uninspired ball, in a season that's over. As opposed to just going through the motions of the status quo, see if another guy can provide you with a spark. That's not too much to ask (or maybe it is for Ron Rivera). If you're going to trumpet "competition" all throughout training camp, only to put a death grip on the status quo, then just shut up. There is a pattern here with Rivera that I don't like, and I'm a staunch Rivera guy. But If he is going to treat "evolution" like he has treated "competition," then I may jump off his bandwagon. 

By the way, If you want to get technical, I WAS THE FIRST to start a thread about how we let a very capable receiver in Willie Snead IV slip through our hands, and of course I was met with the usual Huddle derision when I bought it up a couple of seasons ago, before Snead proved to be more than a fluke. I don't remember if you were one of the parrots or not.

On even more off an off note...In general, I respect your opinions, even if I disagree with them on occasion (especially on Shula).  At least your positions are nuanced as opposed to being pure nut-hugger-esque one way or another. I appreciate that.

 

I can understand your frustration and as you said about me, I can respect your point of view even if  I don't agree. After this is a discussion board and diverse opinions should be welcomed.

I am disappointed Byrd isn't getting more of a chance. The difference is who you attribute the problem to. The coach or player.  I tend to blame individuals not organizations. Given what I do I tend to look for personal responsibility instead of institutional blame.

[CWORS]

On 2/1/2017 at 9:29 AM, sanjay_rajput said:

LB or SS?

 

I say LB. Replace TD in the starting lineup in a couple years!

[Daddy_Uncle]

Cash > Klein

[Daddy_Uncle]

1 hour ago, CWORS said:

I say LB. Replace TD in the starting lineup in a couple years!

Thats literally what Shaq was drafted for

[Captain Morgan]

5 minutes ago, Daddy_Uncle said:

Cash > Klein

I think of Klein as a mlb who can fill in at olb if necessary.  I think of Cash as a olb who can fill in at safety in an emergency.

[Ace_Aladdin]

2 hours ago, Daddy_Uncle said:

Cash > Klein

idk Klein has already proven, we'll see have to see a larger snap count for $