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!

     

I'd like to see......

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

pantherdad Rising Star

pantherdad

Posted
Posted

a formation with King and Rosario on either side of the OL, Barnidge out wide, sutton and J-Stew in I formation.

I think i would catgasm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pantherclaw

The tight ends don't make up for a good, consistent receiver other than steve smith.

You don't think Rosario and Barnidge have come far enough along to become receiving threats along with Smith? Thats what I'm saying.... You get those TE's involved more,(particularly Rosario and Barnidge, King is your blocker) get some consistancy going with some short passes, then when the TE's get more attention than they should, he is gonna hit Smith with the kiss of death, everytime. (don't forget, we are still gonna run the ball like crazy)

This, from a few topics above. great minds must think alike.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lumps Newbie

Lumps

Posted
Posted

a formation with King and Rosario on either side of the OL, Barnidge out wide, sutton and J-Stew in I formation.

I think i would catgasm.

I want a formation with Angelina Jolie and Hayden on the sides with Scarlett Johnson wide and the Olsen twins in formation, but it isn't going to happen. Too many TEs for Fox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captroop Veteran

Captroop

Posted
Posted

I want a formation with Angelina Jolie and Hayden on the sides with Scarlett Johnson wide and the Olsen twins in formation, but it isn't going to happen. Too many TEs for Fox.

That's ridiculous. Everyone knows Jolie prefers to be spread out wide. I would, however, like to play QB and have Scarlett be my Center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pantherdad Rising Star

pantherdad

Posted
Posted

Pantherdad flappin his gums, when he completely missed the point of the post he quoted. Good stuff. Flap them some more.

hey dick, i didn't miss your point.....you asked about two consistant receivers, and i gave you my opinion. you don't like it? all i can say is get the f**k over it. you wanna cry about it some more? I'm sorry, i didn't know my reponses would make you all emotional....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raskle Contributor

Raskle

Posted
Posted

hey dick, i didn't miss your point.....you asked about two consistant receivers, and i gave you my opinion. you don't like it? all i can say is get the f**k over it. you wanna cry about it some more? I'm sorry, i didn't know my reponses would make you all emotional....

Seriously? You're going to call him a name when it was you who pulled his response from a totally separate thread and out of context? Then you proceed to follow it up with a "get over it"? Looks to me like it's you who is the only person crying and emotional here.

:rolleyes:

As to Zod's OP, I'd love to see the TE's more involved in the passing game. I just hope Fox willl allow Davidson to open up the field for these guys. They can obviously catch the ball well, so why not use one of their strengths? Seems silly not to, really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pantherdad Rising Star

pantherdad

Posted
Posted

Seriously? You're going to call him a name when it was you who pulled his response from a totally separate thread and out of context? Then you proceed to follow it up with a "get over it"? Looks to me like it's you who is the only person crying and emotional here.

:rolleyes:

As to Zod's OP, I'd love to see the TE's more involved in the passing game. I just hope Fox willl allow Davidson to open up the field for these guys. They can obviously catch the ball well, so why not use one of their strengths? Seems silly not to, really.

yeah, i made a similar post on another thread....and it spilled over to this thread because of the similarity of the TE talk. so, no, i did not pull this out of context. i posted on the other thread that i would love to see consistant TE play incorporated with the WR position. how is that out of context. I'm sure pantherclawz is a big boy, he doesn't need you to hold his hand or be his message board back up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...