Panthers pick up option on Torrey Smith

[thefuzz]

I have never seen a stronger case of Stockholm Syndrome in my life.

[Lumps]

15 hours ago, MasterAwesome said:

 

Again....what was the WR depth chart in the second half of the season after Torrey came back from injury?

“BUT RON AND HIS VETS!!!!”

The same as it should’ve been the first half of the season before the injury.

Get it?

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, stbugs said:

Is safety the only position we need? It’s a simple reasoning. If we are still thinking we have A possibility that Smith is on the roster then that’s 5 million off the table. Same with Kalil. That’s $12.25m that’s is on hold right now and if we wanted a S, C and OLB/DE in FA then we don’t have $5.5m for safety. If we just made the call to not waste money then we’d easily be able to afford him.

Also, if you read the tweets, we were interested but got costed out and Weddle was released so he’s a perfect FA to protect picks for Williams and Funchess. Amazing how many hoops some people go through to protect Hurney and Rivera’s image when together they’ve been mediocre. 

A whole lot of ifs.

Keeping Smith is NOT a bad move IMO. Before injury, he was developing a rapport with Cam and numbers were trending up. THen he and Cam got bit by the injury bug and we know how the story played out.

Costed out? Because we didn't want to pay a 34 yr old safety above market rates? There are other options available. I'll wait.

It's more amazing how some people create reasons to post hate for all team actions, some which are not bad, just to add negatives to Hurney or Rivera. 

[Mr. Scot]

2 hours ago, Sasquatch said:

We're currently showing almost 15 million in cap space and that's with the Smith money and the draft pool set aside. 

This is incorrect.

It should also be noted that the cap figures being floated right now only count the top 51 players.

[Toomers]

5 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

A whole lot of ifs.

Keeping Smith is NOT a bad move IMO. Before injury, he was developing a rapport with Cam and numbers were trending up. THen he and Cam got bit by the injury bug and we know how the story played out.

Costed out? Because we didn't want to pay a 34 yr old safety above market rates? There are other options available. I'll wait.

It's more amazing how some people create reasons to post hate for all team actions, some which are not bad, just to add negatives to Hurney or Rivera. 

Then let’s hear about all the moves the current FO has gotten right that involved the cap, FA, trade. Let’s see where the pattern takes us and just see who’s got legitimate claims and who’s hoping incompetent people SUDDENLY become competent.

[Mr. Scot]

1 hour ago, thefuzz said:

I have never seen a stronger case of Stockholm Syndrome in my life.

I don't know if I'd call it Stockholm Syndrome, maybe a version of it.

I think there are some folks who so badly want this team to be good that they'll respond to any suggestion they might not be with "la la la la I can't hear you".

For these people, it doesn't matter whether Hurney was bad in the past or shows sign of making the same mistakes now. They just refuse to hear it. And they're going to keep on acting like everything is great and every move the team makes is brilliant, even if we crash and burn.

Granted, you've also got those folks who will defend Hurney to the death just because Dave Gettleman cut their favorite player, but that's different. Those guys are just being stupid.

So for me, "Stockholm Syndrome" might not be exactly the right term. Maybe a mix of it with a Pollyanna type optimism / denial thrown in. But being there's not exactly one word to describe that kind of behavior, I guess "Stockholm Syndrome" is as good as anything.

Given the history of this team, I can understand being weary with inconsistency and losing, and as a result not wanting to accept that there might be more of it. But the reality is that denying the existence of flaws and problems doesn't make them go away.

To put it another way, you can argue till your last breath that Marty Hurney is a good GM and Ron Rivera is a fantastic head coach, but that's not going to make those things true.

[thefuzz]

25 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Then let’s hear about all the moves the current FO has gotten right that involved the cap, FA, trade. Let’s see where the pattern takes us and just see who’s got legitimate claims and who’s hoping incompetent people SUDDENLY become competent.

Was thinking about that earlier when reading a couple threads.

Outside of the draft, as we are only 1 season into it...what exactly has Marty done RIGHT?

 

[thefuzz]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't know if I'd call it Stockholm Syndrome, maybe a version of it.

I think there are some folks who so badly want this team to be good that they'll respond to any suggestion they might not be with "la la la la I can't hear you".

For these people, it doesn't matter whether Hurney was bad in the past or shows sign of making the same mistakes now. They just refuse to hear it. And they're going to keep on acting like everything is great and every move the team makes is brilliant, even if we crash and burn.

Granted, you've also got those folks who will defend Hurney to the death just because Dave Gettleman cut their favorite player, but that's different. Those guys are just stupid.

So for me, "Stockholm Syndrome" might not be exactly the right term. Maybe a mix of it with a Pollyanna type optimism / denial thrown in. But being there's not exactly one word to describe that kind of behavior, I guess "Stockholm Syndrome" is as good as anything.

Given the history of this team, I can understand being weary with inconsistency and losing, and as a result not wanting to accept that there might be more of it. But the reality is that denying the existence of flaws and problems doesn't make them go away.

To put it another way, you can argue till your last breath that Marty Hurney is a good GM and Ron Rivera is a fantastic head coach, but that's not going to make those things true.

I think that some folks think that being a "fan", makes you have to like or love whomever or whatever you are a fan of no matter what.  I just don't see it that way.  I said this on twitter yesterday, but "fans" who are like that make owning an NFL team a no lose situation.

Browns "fans" show up to every game.  Buy tons of gear.  Watch every away game on TV.  And are known as some of the best fans in the NFL.  Why?  What has that team (until recently) done to earn that non wavering support?

What has this team done lately to earn that support?

That's why I used the term Stockholm Syndrome.  We are so captivated by football and the NFL that many will swear their allegiance to said team no matter what they do to them.  It's wild.

[Sasquatch]

27 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

It should also be noted that the cap figures being floated right now only count the top 51 players.

Which is what counts until week 1. OTC reports 17 millionish without the rookie pool. Spotrac says just under 15 million with roughly 3.5 million rookie cap included.

There's obviously going to be adjustments for all teams when all money counts at the start  of week 1. Torrey's deal will obviously be revisited then.

[MasterAwesome]

1 hour ago, Lumps said:

The same as it should’ve been the first half of the season before the injury.

Get it?

So if someone asked you to predict next season’s depth chart, your logic would be to use the depth chart from the first half of the previous season...not the most recently established depth chart. Yes, I think I do get it.

I wonder if Cleveland fans are scared that their coaching staff is gonna play Tyrod over Baker to start this year...since their depth chart followed the same pattern. Doubt it...unless our board decides to jump ship to become Cleveland fans. No no let me guess, “No because only Ron loves vets!!”, right? But how come Cleveland, Arizona, Buffalo, and Baltimore all had their rookie first-round QBs on the bench to start the season? Y’all are acting like this concept of starting vets over rookies is some Ron Rivera original, which shows that you live in a bubble.

And it’s funny that you rage about the depth chart of the half of the season that we went 6-2, and say that it should’ve mirrored the half that went 1-7...? Thanks for the brief glimpse into your brain, I get it now.

[Sasquatch]

34 minutes ago, Toomers said:

Then let’s hear about all the moves the current FO has gotten right that involved the cap, FA, trade. Let’s see where the pattern takes us and just see who’s got legitimate claims and who’s hoping incompetent people SUDDENLY become competent.

So you're wanting to discuss Hurney's decisions since his return to GM duties? That's last February. Obviously, I see more benefit to keeping the players we have under contract UNTIL we find a suitable replacement who will come at an acceptable price. I'm not a fan of the thought that you dump players currently under contract  in the hope that you can sign someone else. I'm more in  tune with gauging the market, talking to available players, and determining roster adjustments that may be needed to make the fits happen.

[Toomers]

13 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

I think that some folks think that being a "fan", makes you have to like or love whomever or whatever you are a fan of no matter what.  I just don't see it that way.  I said this on twitter yesterday, but "fans" who are like that make owning an NFL team a no lose situation.

Browns "fans" show up to every game.  Buy tons of gear.  Watch every away game on TV.  And are known as some of the best fans in the NFL.  Why?  What has that team (until recently) done to earn that non wavering support?

What has this team done lately to earn that support?

That's why I used the term Stockholm Syndrome.  We are so captivated by football and the NFL that many will swear their allegiance to said team no matter what they do to them.  It's wild.

It fits. I’ve been trying to pin it down, but that’s close enough. 

[Mr. Scot]

19 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

I think that some folks think that being a "fan", makes you have to like or love whomever or whatever you are a fan of no matter what.  I just don't see it that way.  I said this on twitter yesterday, but "fans" who are like that make owning an NFL team a no lose situation.

Browns "fans" show up to every game.  Buy tons of gear.  Watch every away game on TV.  And are known as some of the best fans in the NFL.  Why?  What has that team (until recently) done to earn that non wavering support?

What has this team done lately to earn that support?

That's why I used the term Stockholm Syndrome.  We are so captivated by football and the NFL that many will swear their allegiance to said team no matter what they do to them.  It's wild.

Fair assessment.

It's kind of like sticking with the girlfriend who treats you badly and constantly cheats on you because "you just really love her" and "in your eyes, she's perfect".

There's a point where being a fan becomes being an enabler.

[Toomers]

1 minute ago, Sasquatch said:

So you're wanting to discuss Hurney's decisions since his return to GM duties? That's last February. Obviously, I see more benefit to keeping the players we have under contract UNTIL we find a suitable replacement who will come at an acceptable price. I'm not a fan of the thought that you dump players currently under contract  in the hope that you can sign someone else. I'm more in  tune with gauging the market, talking to available players, and determining roster adjustments that may be needed to make the fits happen.

It starts with cutting a cheap PK before 2017 season. Go from there.

 And if the player is not, under any circumstances, worth 5M, what would you keep him for?An aging, injured, declining WR with the worst hands in the NFL. There’s my case. Are those legitimate or are we just complaining to complain.