Putting Corn on IR was a mistake.

[LinvilleGorge]

9 minutes ago, dldove77 said:

He knows more than you. 

I always love these types of comments. Why do people like this even bother trying to talk about football? Yes, people employed by NFL organizations know more about football than us. We should all just not bother talking about anything. 

[LinvilleGorge]

11 minutes ago, dldove77 said:

Butker and Gano are both currently on rosters. Corn is still injured. What exactly are you arguing? That he should have rostered the injured guy and cut a guy who belonged on a roster? I mean, I get people hate Hurney for what he did years ago, but let it go. He knows more than you. 

Butker didn't belong on the roster. He played the same number of snaps for the Panthers in the regular season that you and I have. You just don't carry two kickers on the active roster. It's not even about Corn as much as it is about anyone else who could have potentially actually helped bolster the roster. We wasted a roster spot during a critical roster building time in a hair brained attempt to fetch a conditional late round draft pick. It is what it is. 

[RoaringRiot]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Butker didn't belong on the roster. He played the same number of snaps for the Panthers in the regular season that you and I have. You just don't carry two kickers on the active roster. It's not even about Corn as much as it is about anyone else who could have potentially actually helped bolster the roster. We wasted a roster spot during a critical roster building time in a hair brained attempt to fetch a conditional late round draft pick. It is what it is. 

Can you give us some specifics on who we missed out on that could have potentially helped us because of keeping two kickers? I know "what if" is a common argument, but it's just not accurate. Sorry. 

[TheSpecialJuan]

meh

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, RoaringRiot said:

Can you give us some specifics on who we missed out on that could have potentially helped us because of keeping two kickers? I know "what if" is a common argument, but it's just not accurate. Sorry. 

What isn't accurate? I'm not going to go back and look for specific names. I just don't care enough about it to do it. I just think it's funny that people are trying to give credit to Hurney for a failed effort to trade a kicker when myself and others were saying all along that no one was trading anything for either of our kickers. Kickers and punters are almost never traded and the ones who do get traded are established elite guys. I mean, I think it was you who was saying in the preseason that Butker couldn't hit anything in practice so why keep the guy? He's worked out great for the Chiefs but there's still no way in hell anyone was giving anything for one of our kickers knowing full well one of them would get cut soon anyway. 

[RoaringRiot]

13 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

What isn't accurate? I'm not going to go back and look for specific names. I just don't care enough about it to do it. I just think it's funny that people are trying to give credit to Hurney for a failed effort to trade a kicker when myself and others were saying all along that no one was trading anything for either of our kickers. Kickers and punters are almost never traded and the ones who do get traded are established elite guys. I mean, I think it was you who was saying in the preseason that Butker couldn't hit anything in practice so why keep the guy? He's worked out great for the Chiefs but there's still no way in hell anyone was giving anything for one of our kickers knowing full well one of them would get cut soon anyway. 

I think they were seeing about a trade, but even more making sure they were making the correct K decision. Yes Butker was behind in camp but when Gano missed for the second time in the 4th game I think it made them worried and they wanted to see how Gano would play in the first few games. That's more important than the bottom of the roster inactives IMO

[electro's horse]

what the fug is it with hurney and keeping extra kickers

[Piff]

Y'all are putting too much stock in a 5th round rookie. I'm not saying Corn is a bad player but he is inexperienced. They were probably ok with the depth at DB at the time. 

[LinvilleGorge]

17 minutes ago, RoaringRiot said:

I think they were seeing about a trade, but even more making sure they were making the correct K decision. Yes Butker was behind in camp but when Gano missed for the second time in the 4th game I think it made them worried and they wanted to see how Gano would play in the first few games. That's more important than the bottom of the roster inactives IMO

I can understand that. 

But based on Rivera's comments, I think Gano was always gonna be our kicker. 

[RoaringRiot]

18 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I can understand that. 

But based on Rivera's comments, I think Gano was always gonna be our kicker. 

I can't argue that. I wish Butker would have given them more, but yeah you're right he was going to have to be much better for RR to cut Gano. 

[BIGH2001]

Hindsight makes everyone look like a genius.  This is a ridiculous reactionary thread.  Plus he's a 5th round rookie so who the knows what the hell we would have gotten.

[TN05]

2 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

We wasted a roster spot during a critical roster building time in a hair brained attempt to fetch a conditional late round draft pick. It is what it is. 

Our 53rd roster spot wouldn't have done squat to change the outcome of any game this season, for bad or good. Does that 53rd spot help us beat the Saints or the Bears? Not likely.

[sharkkiller]

2 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

What isn't accurate? I'm not going to go back and look for specific names. I just don't care enough about it to do it. I just think it's funny that people are trying to give credit to Hurney for a failed effort to trade a kicker when myself and others were saying all along that no one was trading anything for either of our kickers. Kickers and punters are almost never traded and the ones who do get traded are established elite guys. I mean, I think it was you who was saying in the preseason that Butker couldn't hit anything in practice so why keep the guy? He's worked out great for the Chiefs but there's still no way in hell anyone was giving anything for one of our kickers knowing full well one of them would get cut soon anyway. 

Your entire argument here is that keeping Butker on the roster to be inactive meant that someone else who was more valuable should have been on the roster. And yet you cannot or will not explain who exactly should have been in his spot.

He was inactive, and if there was someone else in his spot, they would have been inactive too. So keeping two kickers had absolutely no effect on the roster. It only serves to give Hurney haters something to bitch about.

[TN05]

2 hours ago, electro's horse said:

what the fug is it with hurney and keeping extra kickers

Prior to 2010, kickoff specialists were not really unheard of. Basically, if you had an older kicker who still had a good leg (like we did), and a punter who wasn't great at kickoffs, you might not want to have that kicker wasting his aging leg on kickoffs. A kickoff specialist would make your kicker last longer and give you a much higher chance of a touchback (much more useful when kickoffs were attempted from further back and return specialists were more common).

It could also be useful with a younger kicker, letting him focus entirely on field goals rather than having to worry about kickoffs as well. It's not ideal - it would be preferred to have your kicker or punter handle he job - but there are worse uses for the 53rd roster spot.