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!

     

"He is the type of back that you build your team around"

UNCrules2187

By UNCrules2187,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

UNCrules2187 Mentor

UNCrules2187

Posted
Posted

"He is the kind of runner that you want on your team," said an AFC personnel executive. "He is explosive and instinctive. He is strong enough to take the pounding, but also has the speed and quickness to take it the distance. People always talk about wanting 'big' backs, but he is the type of back that you build your team around. "

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/bucky_brooks/12/05/week14/index.html

Awesome article talking about why DeAngelo is flourishing this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
Posted

I am no Delhomme hater, but imagine if we had a stud QB to compliment the running game.

No, I am not saying number 17 is bad, he is good, but I would love to see a stud.

I'm not a 17 hater either, but his antics have held us back recently more than helped us.:driving:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted

He runs with such power and balance when he is low to the ground. Having two great backs isn't something I am accustomed to. I wonder what the future holds.

The future looks very bright for this running game, and the team in general. We are young and talented at many of the key positions, and are set up to be a force in the NFC for years to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The NFL Shield At Midfield Grand Master

The NFL Shield At Midfield

Posted
Posted

If we had a stud QB we wouldn't be fighting for 1st place this week we would own it already.

Or if the defense hadn't given up 45 points two weeks ago, or if Marshall wouldn't have bounced harmlessly off Harry Douglas, or if Goings had picked up Winfield's blitz, or if Rosario would have blocked better for Baker and not let his man come untouched into the backfield, etc. and so on.

The point is, you can't point to a single player and say "it's all his fault". But someone always will.

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...