Our Picks According to PFT

[CRA]

A 4.9 difference its not absurd. Noticable but not huge.

Also its not as if they played at 4.9 difference every game. It over the whole season.

Captian didn't play half the number snaps Gamble or Marshall did. So I don't think its realistic to say after one year, after half the snaps Captian is as good.

True, it ranks who had the more productive overall season. From there you can draw your own opinons.

4.9 is absurd. Marshall was not better in coverage in 2009 than Gamble...neither was great but Marhall wasn't better and definately not to a "noticeable" degree.

well obviously, Captain didn't get tons of reps....but when he did, he looked as good as Marshall. In fact, think that has a lot to do w/ why Marshall was put out there to see if someone was interested.

[brandon_87]

Mardy Gilyard = Keary Colbert

r u nuts? colbert was garbage and slow as hell, at least Gilyard is fast

[MaineManPanther]

4.9 is absurd. Marshall was not better in coverage in 2009 than Gamble...neither was great but Marhall wasn't better and definately not to a "noticeable" degree.

well obviously, Captain didn't get tons of reps....but when he did, he looked as good as Marshall. In fact, think that has a lot to do w/ why Marshall was put out there to see if someone was interested.

The only explanation you give to explain why its absurd, is it just is. All you use is your personal opinon, memory and anlaysis.

Click on the specific player and seem game to game how it added up. Of those game which ones are incorrect that lead to this "absurd' number?

[CRA]

The only explanation you give to explain why its absurd, is it just is. All you use is your personal opinon, memory and anlaysis.

Click on the specific player and seem game to game how it added up. Of those game which ones are incorrect that lead to this "absurd' number?

you haven't given me anything put some website......tell me who and how many people rate the Panthers? The owners has already commented before on all that before.....

There site says Marshall is noticeably better than Gamble in coverage, that Stewart was a noticeablly overall better RB than DeAngelo in 2009 (when on the field), Godrey looked better in coverage than Martin.....sorry, but I don't think I need to go to great lengths to argue against those. What those stats are showing, didn't show in reality. At least not to me nor would I imagnie most Panther fans.

[MaineManPanther]

you haven't given me anything put some website......tell me who and how many people rate the Panthers? The owners has already commented before on all that before.....

There site says Marshall is noticeably better than Gamble in coverage, that Stewart was a noticeablly overall better RB than DeAngelo in 2009 (when on the field), Godrey looked better in coverage than Martin.....sorry, but I don't think I need to go to great lengths to argue against those. What those stats are showing, didn't show in reality. At least not to me nor would I imagnie most Panther fans.

Deanglo was in the top ten for much of the season then in his final six games dropped signifcantly. He had one game he did real well in. Two he had an awful 2.2 and 2.5 ypc. The other three didnt even play. Then add in the other awful games he had with Was and Philly.

Stewart on the other hand missed zero games. So in the time Deanglo was out, Stewart had the whole job himself to improve his poistion and season and did so with huge games at the end. Also Stewert had only two games in which he averaged under 3 yards per carry.

So its not to hard to see why Stewart was rated higer: He played every game, didnt hit as many lows and some big highs.

[C47]

r u nuts? colbert was garbage and slow as hell, at least Gilyard is fast

From http://nfldraft.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=285546

Keary Colbert: One player who really helped himself with his workouts was wide receiver Keary Colbert. Like Justin Fargas in the 2003 draft, Colbert boosted his status with some good 40-times in the low 4.4 range and a 36-inch vertical leap. Most of the mock drafts have Colbert as a late day 1 selection, but at least one service projected Colbert to slip to round #4. ESPN actually thinks Colbert could go as high as #51 to Baltimore and some people think Baltimore will draft Colbert, just with the 88th pick one round later. Tampa Bay also could select Colbert at #79 with the 16th pick of the 3rd round. Colbert gets a grade of 79 out of 100 from Scouts, Inc. They feel he can be a 3rd receiver in the NFL, in the mold of Keenan McCardell.

From http://www.cincyjungle.com/2010/3/10/1367194/mardy-gilyard-improves-his-40-time

The University of Cincinnati held their Pro Day on Wednesday with guys like Mardy Gilyard and Tony Pike trying to improve upon their so-so numbers during the NFL Combine late last month. There were 13 players on display for 26 teams, including 49ers head coach Mike Singletary. In attendance for the Bengals were wide receivers coach Mike Sheppard, special teams coach Darrin Simmons and director of football operations Jim Lippencott.

Gilyard, Joe Reedy writes, improved his 40-time from 4.56 to 4.47 and made a few nice grabs. Tony Pike, on the other hand, "struggled early with a couple of his passes sailing high" and there "were also a couple times when he wasn’t on the same page as his receivers". He would eventually settle down.

So no Gilyard isn't faster then Colbert was, look poo up before you post it....

[CRA]

Deanglo was in the top ten for much of the season then in his final six games dropped signifcantly. He had one game he did real well in. Two he had an awful 2.2 and 2.5 ypc. The other three didnt even play. Then add in the other awful games he had with Was and Philly.

Stewart on the other hand missed zero games. So in the time Deanglo was out, Stewart had the whole job himself to improve his poistion and season and did so with huge games at the end. Also Stewert had only two games in which he averaged under 3 yards per carry.

So its not to hard to see why Stewart was rated higer: He played every game, didnt hit as many lows and some big highs.

playing in every game or missing games is irrelevant in his ratings. he is simply rating them based on there play......

like i said, if you are strictly looking at those 2 when on the field.....neither was significantly better than the other. However, his rating claim Stewart was in fact signifacantly better when on the field than DeAngelo last years......The guy rated Beanie Wells as a better RB in 2009 than DWill.....?! 24 RBs were better when on the field than Williams per there ratings (again, time missed doesn't count against a player). If you agree, with that fine......I think that is absurd.

[MaineManPanther]

playing in every game or missing games is irrelevant in his ratings. he is simply rating them based on there play......

like i said, if you are strictly looking at those 2 when on the field.....neither was significantly better than the other. However, his rating claim Stewart was in fact signifacantly better when on the field than DeAngelo last years......The guy rated Beanie Wells as a better RB in 2009 than DWill.....?! 24 RBs were better when on the field than Williams per there ratings (again, time missed doesn't count against a player). If you agree, with that fine......I think that is absurd.

Its not irelevant. It doesnt directly count agianst williams. However as williams sat out injured the majority of the players behind him kept playing well and rising there stock. So starting around week 12 Williams brought himself down with some bad games, he then couldnt make up for/defend his spot because he was out, meaning he couldnt add performaces to sustain his high ranking, thus allowing other players to jump his spot.

So no he wasnt punished. But was in limbo, while players below him rose up. And because he wasnt playing couldnt keep his spot.