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!

     

Panthers waive David Moore (OL)

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Newbie Experienced

Newbie

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

46 replies in 4 hours to the cutting of an UDFA during camp.

 

 

 

 

We're officially bored people.

In all fairness, he was an UDFA that most of us were familiar with from Senior Bowl. Something went horribly wrong because they rolled his a$$ pretty quick. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SBBlue Veteran

SBBlue

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I am not going to take any pleasure in the seemingly inevitable "I told you so's" for that OL group. That is honestly why I have been so massively down on the offseason we had. This was our opportunity to really improve that unit with another deep interior OL group and a deeper than normal OT group in the draft. Instead, we drafted a guy that they don't even seem to have a clear idea what to do with, a 6th rounder and a UDFA that has already been cut. And that isn't even mentioning those idiotic Erving and Elflein contracts. 

I was hesitant to call our OL offseason what I actually though but I am pretty close to it......a fuging disaster. I am just not going to be able to wrap my head around why you would take a bad offensive line from last year, arguably make it worse this season and then bring in a QB that was a huge bust, in no little part due to poor protection. 

Maybe this is just some 7D chess that I just can't understand.

Maybe they were hoping for Sewell, and thought Slater was a reach at 8, and couldn't find a trade partner. 

 Erving was on par with Okung last year.  Scott, Little, and Daley played the other snaps and are returning, so they figure LT performance should be about the same.  Elflein is more up and down.  

Scott's pff at the chargers in 2019 was 49.4 .  It was 60 last year.  They may feel confident they can coach Erving and Elflein up like they did Scott.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, SBBlue said:

Maybe they were hoping for Sewell, and thought Slater was a reach at 8, and couldn't find a trade partner. 

 Erving was on par with Okung last year.  Scott, Little, and Daley played the other snaps and are returning, so they figure LT performance should be about the same.  Elflein is more up and down.  

Scott's pff at the chargers in 2019 was 49.4 .  It was 60 last year.  They may feel confident they can coach Erving and Elflein up like they did Scott.

 

If their confidence is based on Scott, we are in trouble. Scott did a decent job for being an unknown entity to most of us but he was not by an stretch a good offensive lineman.

It is what it is. Not much we can do about it now is watch and hope.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

This was a little bit of a different case because we have such a terrible situation on the OL and this was one of their supposed "key additions" to help possibly shore that up, despite being a UDFA. 

It is disappointing mainly because now we largely look like we will be starting mostly the same unit as last year, save for two lower end journeyman starters/higher quality journeyman backup offensive linemen that we seem to be starting. The depth guys don't exactly inspire thoughts of one of them winning a battle to start over Miller, Erving and Elflein. 

Certainly another hit to the hopes of the contingent of Daley/Brown/Moore/Christensen supporters that thought they would upgrade our OL. Seems like every day those guys just seem to solidify why they aren't the guy. I had lower hopes for that group of rookies and young guys than most but even I am pretty disappointed in the early showing. 

You could make an argument that 2020 was the year that we should have actually addressed the O-line.

Wills, Becton and Wirfs were all available and probably presented as much value, if not more, as taking Slater this year at 8.

 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, AU-panther said:

You could make an argument that 2020 was the year that we should have actually addressed the O-line.

Wills, Becton and Wirfs were all available and probably presented as much value, if not more, as taking Slater this year at 8.

 

Well, we really should have addressed it in 2020 AND 2021. Had we done that, I think we are having a totally different discussion.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...