Carolina Panthers waive Ryan Delaire and Charles Johnson (WR)

[Hoenheim]

3 hours ago, thebigcat said:

Johnson really didn't have a chance once Curtis Samuel was drafted


Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

but Samuel is a slot WR? We have no speed threat on the outside now .. 

[top dawg]

6 minutes ago, Hoenheim said:

but Samuel is a slot WR? We have no speed threat on the outside now .. 

It's probably everyone's hope that Samuel will be able to productively play inside and outside. I believe that he can.

[panther4life]

17 minutes ago, Saca312 said:

Right here:

 

I'm talking about Charles Johnson 

[Hoenheim]

8 minutes ago, top dawg said:

It's probably everyone's hope that Samuel will be able to productively play inside and outside. I believe that he can.

wasn't he drafted particularly for slot? or told he'd be slot? I do hope they give him  a chance on the outside. maybe if stewart is really productive , mccaffrey will see more time in the slot and samuel on the outside 

[UpstatePanther]

4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Glad you put WR in the title.

Yeah I had a mini heart attack until I saw that

4 hours ago, *FreeFua* said:

We desperately need to make a move for a WR before the season starts. 

Hurney has always at least tried to put 2 WR's out there.

He signed Muhammad back in 08, signed Keyshawn in 06. Had every reason to believe Colbert could be a legit number 2 in 05.

He also acknowledged the fact it's a different league now and it's more of a passing league, I'm hopeful he addresses this position somehow still.

3 hours ago, KillerKat said:

I believe this will open the door to keeping 7 LBs and 5 WRs instead of 6 LBs and 6 WRs. I think Boulware's chances to make it have improved now. He's just gotta show up when it's game time.

You may be on to something there

[Saca312]

7 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Looking at every snap is for PFF. The gifs are not really relevant to the argument as to whether the guy has produced AS A RECEIVER. It's obvious---TOTALLY OBVIOUS---that he has NOT!

I assume you're one of those guys who thought Kelvin Benjamin was an all-star last year because he almost hit 1000 yards again without looking at context. The fact you're attempting to argue with "oh hur-dur this guy only got x amount of yards so he must suck" pretty much shows you don't know how to recognize whether a player's good or not.

It's not totally obvious. You base production on statistics, I base mine on how they run routes, move, and basically how they work in their position. I watch them and evaluate them, compare them with traits that determine success or not, and base my conclusion on that.

How did Shepard get those 400 yards? Why so little? I look at snap count, how they were used, how the QB played, and what route/role they were responsible for. I don't look at "oh hey this dude only got x amount of yards he must suck." I look at "how did he do with x route & x playcall? Did he adjust to Winston's poor ball? Did he get himself open? Was his route done properly?

Based on my observations, experience, and evalutation, I can say confidently Shepard will be pretty good. He's an easy upgrade over Brown with a lot of upside. 

Bring up stats all you want, but they don't tell the whole story. Just like with Kelvin Benjamin.

 

[Ace_Aladdin]

3 hours ago, KillerKat said:

I believe this will open the door to keeping 7 LBs and 5 WRs instead of 6 LBs and 6 WRs. I think Boulware's chances to make it have improved now. He's just gotta show up when it's game time.

 

or an Extra TE & RB/FB

@Jeremy Igo

[Hogmolliesmaht]

2 hours ago, carolina-chuck3 said:

We are? Really

Yes, we are...really. He wasn't any big deal himself anyway.

[Mr. Scot]

1 hour ago, top dawg said:

Competitiveness is great and all, but like you said about Rivera, he has no rings. Hell, he didn't even have two consecutive winning seasons (like his predecessor-successor), and failed miserably in his quest to help what most people considered a potential world beater to get a championship when he had a pretty good look to do so. 

Dude, if you really want the whole "higher standards" thing to sound convincing, championing Marty Hurney isn't exactly gonna help your argument.

[grimesgoat]

2 hours ago, top dawg said:

Russell Shepard has proven nothing in the NFL as a receiver. He has less career yards than Charles Johnson (and TJ Graham). Believe all the hype you want about our receiving corps,  just like every year, but it's real silly to rely on rookies (especially an RB) and unknowns to legitimately bolster a receiving corps that has needed upgrading, without trying to legitimately hedge your bets. To keep doing what you've been doing is what's silly.

Also silly is the really tired Huddle argument, that gives itself to silly hyperbole, that "you can't expect pro bowlers at every position," when the preponderance of people who simply desire a GM to put his best foot forward already know this. To me it's just a way to make yourself feel better about the shortcomings of your GM and/or your position group. 

There is really no reason in the world why we couldn't have done better than Charles Johnson. None!

 

Why so bitter?  We're talking about the possible 6th passing option after Olsen, Benjamin, CMC, Samuel, Funchess.  Hell stewie will probably lying get more looks. Unless someone gets hurt, he's not getting more than 200-300 yards anyway. 

[beastson]

Yeah I'm expecting changes this TC

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, Saca312 said:

I assume you're one of those guys who thought Kelvin Benjamin was an all-star last year because he almost hit 1000 yards again without looking at context. The fact you're attempting to argue with "oh hur-dur this guy only got x amount of yards so he must suck" pretty much shows you don't know how to recognize whether a player's good or not.

It's not totally obvious. You base production on statistics, I base mine on how they run routes, move, and basically how they work in their position. I watch them and evaluate them, compare them with traits that determine success or not, and base my conclusion on that.

How did Shepard get those 400 yards? Why so little? I look at snap count, how they were used, how the QB played, and what route/role they were responsible for. I don't look at "oh hey this dude only got x amount of yards he must suck." I look at "how did he do with x route & x playcall? Did he adjust to Winston's poor ball? Did he get himself open? Was his route done properly?

Based on my observations, experience, and evalutation, I can say confidently Shepard will be pretty good. He's an easy upgrade over Brown with a lot of upside. 

Bring up stats all you want, but they don't tell the whole story. Just like with Kelvin Benjamin.

 

Well you're assuming wrong, and I qualified the yardage argument so that you wouldn't get it twisted, but I see that escaped you. 

You can look at all the film until the cows come home, but bottom line is whether a receiver is doing his job well enough to justify his roster spot and his salary relative to someone else who is more than willing to take it. Shepard did not, and he ultimately ended up here as a special teams ace with some potential to play the position of receiver.  But potential does not equal production, plain and simple!

Film is great, and it's a necessary tool that is used to develop and support opinions about players, but just like stats don't tell the whole story, neither does film. The problem with film is that you have good and bad, and people usually concentrate on the good. Stats are much harder to be manipulated, and especially the bottom line: production! It's easy to get carried away with film and/or stats, particularly if you're trying to support a point, that's why it's best to be as objective as possible in your analysis of both. Context, which is arguably more difficult to pin down when added to film and stats, is an absolutely essential part of the analysis, but it is also arguably the one that's most contentious. 

Shepard may be pretty good as a receiver, but he has yet to prove it in his career. You can disagree all you like, but I'm tired of arguing about that which should be obvious. Whether you're purposefully side stepping my point, or you're just not understanding, I am going to stop going around in circles with you.

Potential doesn't mean a damned thing if year after year you fail to meet it.

 

[top dawg]

41 minutes ago, grimesgoat said:

Why so bitter?  We're talking about the possible 6th passing option after Olsen, Benjamin, CMC, Samuel, Funchess.  Hell stewie will probably lying get more looks. Unless someone gets hurt, he's not getting more than 200-300 yards anyway. 

I'm not bitter at all, just a little frustrated by all the smoke and mirrors as to why our receiving corps is a slam dunk sensation when history and common sense says that that doesn't have to be the case, especially if using Russell Shepard (or CJ, or a rookie) to make that case.

[KB_fan]

I was driving and thus offline for 5 or 6 hours tonight and so when I arrived at my destination I quickly skimmed twitter for Panthers news and saw the headline that Delaire and Charles Johnson released.  Nearly fainted because I thought we'd let two DEs go and wondered how we were going to have a pass rush.  Please stay healthy and ball out original CJ.  We're counting on you.

TBH I'm glad Charles Johnson #2 is gone it was much too much of a hassle to have to always designate which CJ we were talking about!