SB nation article says you are stupid if you think there's a true QB controversy

[SmokinwithWilly]

4 hours ago, Cpt slay a ho said:

As far as cam’s health, he’s no more injured than most the qbs in the league, however if we start him when a 100% healthy and he either bombs his 3-4 starts or gets injured than it’s easier to move on from him and begin the Kyle Allen era

I'd say Cam is more injured than most QBs in the league. As far as we know. He hasn't been able to play game speed since surgery uninjured and as such, we haven't really seen what he is yet. We all know that he's never going to be 100% again. That's just a fact that comes with age and the number of hits he's taken. I'd venture to say he's probably between 85-90% of what young fully healthy Cam used to be. That's my opinion only, and I would say that's just a having been through several injuries myself. Even though 30 isn't old, you still don't bounce back quite as quickly as 23-24. That's not a bash at Cam, but I'd say a reasonable guess.

I'm just glad we have a KA right now as a backup and aren't trotting a Jimmy Pickles clone onto the field every Sunday. I think the only real controversy we have is if Cam is at 80-90% healed, does Ron try to bring him back early? I hope not, but it's possible. Carolina has the benefit of having a possibly good backup/starter QB in KA while our franchise QB heals. It's reminiscent of Wentz/Foles and Brady/Cassel with the backup having success. 

I really hope that when he does return as the starter, the issue with him getting to the line slowly gets addressed. I think that's why he does so well in the hurry up is he has time at the line to adjust as needed. Maybe recognizing that is a blessing in disguise from these injuries. 

[Cpt slay a ho]

2 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I'd say Cam is more injured than most QBs in the league. As far as we know. He hasn't been able to play game speed since surgery uninjured and as such, we haven't really seen what he is yet. We all know that he's never going to be 100% again. That's just a fact that comes with age and the number of hits he's taken. I'd venture to say he's probably between 85-90% of what young fully healthy Cam used to be. That's my opinion only, and I would say that's just a having been through several injuries myself. Even though 30 isn't old, you still don't bounce back quite as quickly as 23-24. That's not a bash at Cam, but I'd say a reasonable guess.

I'm just glad we have a KA right now as a backup and aren't trotting a Jimmy Pickles clone onto the field every Sunday. I think the only real controversy we have is if Cam is at 80-90% healed, does Ron try to bring him back early? I hope not, but it's possible. Carolina has the benefit of having a possibly good backup/starter QB in KA while our franchise QB heals. It's reminiscent of Wentz/Foles and Brady/Cassel with the backup having success. 

I really hope that when he does return as the starter, the issue with him getting to the line slowly gets addressed. I think that's why he does so well in the hurry up is he has time at the line to adjust as needed. Maybe recognizing that is a blessing in disguise from these injuries. 

I agree with most of your statement except the injury part, let me rephrase, I don’t think cam is injured to the point of missing games as often as it seems.

rodgers, luck, Wentz, Watson, Stafford, Trubisky, Jimmy G have missed as much or more time that cam has. He’s had the unfortunate luck of getting hit with a foot injury just after a serious shoulder injury.  Now depending on how he bounces back then I’ll be ready to hop on the “he’s breaking down” boat 

[Bronn]

12 hours ago, raz said:

as a socialist rabble rabble rabble  

lol

[Wolfpack352]

LOL...I actually cannot wait for Cam to come back and play, if he balls out and wins, GREAT!!!!  If he poos the bed....well.....end of debate!!

[Waldo]

I wish I had time to do an in depth statistical comparison of Allen's first 5 games to other QBs first 5 games. It's been chrunging in my mind for a while and I just can't get to it. It would seem that is valuble insight into the possibility of Allen being our future or just a good contributor with tantalizing value.

[1of10Charnatives]

49 minutes ago, Bronn said:

lol

Not trying to start a debate that belongs in the Tinderbox here, but I just want to make one point to everyone because I think it’s something we as football fans have a blind spot for:

You cannot simultaneously decry socialism and be okay with tax dollars building football stadiums for highly profitable private businesses. That is the definition of socialism, not to mention the NFL claiming exclusive rights to broadcasts over public airwaves they don’t pay for.

You can say socialism is bad or you can be okay with taxpayers building NFL stadiums. You cannot do both without engaging in hypocrisy. This also isn’t particularly directed at Bronn, just a side note for everyone to consider.

[Bronn]

14 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

Not trying to start a debate that belongs in the Tinderbox here, but I just want to make one point to everyone because I think it’s something we as football fans have a blind spot for:

You cannot simultaneously decry socialism and be okay with tax dollars building football stadiums for highly profitable private businesses. That is the definition of socialism, not to mention the NFL claiming exclusive rights to broadcasts over public airwaves they don’t pay for.

You can say socialism is bad or you can be okay with taxpayers building NFL stadiums. You cannot do both without engaging in hypocrisy. This also isn’t particularly directed at Bronn, just a side note for everyone to consider.

I lol'd because raz is clearly not a socialist

[Peppers90 NC]

14 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

Not trying to start a debate that belongs in the Tinderbox here, but I just want to make one point to everyone because I think it’s something we as football fans have a blind spot for:

You cannot simultaneously decry socialism and be okay with tax dollars building football stadiums for highly profitable private businesses. That is the definition of socialism, not to mention the NFL claiming exclusive rights to broadcasts over public airwaves they don’t pay for.

You can say socialism is bad or you can be okay with taxpayers building NFL stadiums. You cannot do both without engaging in hypocrisy. This also isn’t particularly directed at Bronn, just a side note for everyone to consider.

Is the tinderbox so dead that the piranhas are so desperate to get their jollys off that it has spilled over in the main forum? It really has gotten out of hand.

[twylyght]

24 minutes ago, Peppers90 NC said:

Is the tinderbox so dead that the piranhas are so desperate to get their jollys off that it has spilled over in the main forum? It really has gotten out of hand.

When what has become the echo chamber gets boring, yes

[1of10Charnatives]

2 hours ago, Bronn said:

I lol'd because raz is clearly not a socialist

Ah, gotcha. I was really just jumping on a mention to run a thing up a flagpole. I’m shameless that way.

[1of10Charnatives]

2 hours ago, Peppers90 NC said:

Is the tinderbox so dead that the piranhas are so desperate to get their jollys off that it has spilled over in the main forum? It really has gotten out of hand.

I have never posted to tinderbox and I never plan to, and I do ask the huddle’s askance cause I know that was skirting the line. I did it because I think it’s something football fans need to ask ourselves whether we want to talk politics or not. People want to keep those things separate a lot of the time, but I think this is fundamental enough that it shouldn’t be entirely divorced from the football conversations.

[Bronn]

2 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

I have never posted to tinderbox and I never plan to, and I do ask the huddle’s askance cause I know that was skirting the line. I did it because I think it’s something football fans need to ask ourselves whether we want to talk politics or not. People want to keep those things separate a lot of the time, but I think this is fundamental enough that it shouldn’t be entirely divorced from the football conversations.

100% we do have these conversations both internally and publicly in the TB.

I've flat out said before that I don't care all that much if the league folds completely, because I tire of the owners a lot, and a lot of the players sometimes too. Political and social aspects do impact that.

 

[Peppers90 NC]

1 hour ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

I have never posted to tinderbox and I never plan to, and I do ask the huddle’s askance cause I know that was skirting the line. I did it because I think it’s something football fans need to ask ourselves whether we want to talk politics or not. People want to keep those things separate a lot of the time, but I think this is fundamental enough that it shouldn’t be entirely divorced from the football conversations.

What the tinderbox has done has created enemies and the hatred from there comes over to the main forum, where we should have the very least, the Carolina Panthers best interests in common. But no, once you(not you) find out someone is on the other side of the political spectrum, you will never agree with them on anything else. It's the way of the 2010's unfortunately.

[Mr. Scot]

11 minutes ago, Peppers90 NC said:

What the tinderbox has done has created enemies and the hatred from there comes over to the main forum, where we should have the very least, the Carolina Panthers best interests in common. But no, once you(not you) find out someone is on the other side of the political spectrum, you will never agree with them on anything else. It's the way of the 2010's unfortunately.

Pretty much.

The original reason the Tinderbox was created was specifically to keep controversial topics out of the other forums. But now it's turned into a breeding ground for animosity that spills over into everywhere else.

I know Igo has talked about removing it altogether if people can't keep their sh-t under control. Stuff like this isn't exactly encouraging on that front.