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 Apparently "love" Luke Kuechly


Gabeking

Recommended Posts

I have no problem drafting Keuchly if the team is doubtful about Beason and Davis' return. It's actually a really smart move IMO.

The issue I took is with the comment that he would play over Anderson. That, in my opinion, is a pretty radical statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why we will be passing him over.

If Coples, Claiborne, Blackmon don't fall....Luke has a great shot. Rivera is the anti Fox....if he says DT isn't a huge need he won't grab one when he can get the same caliber one in the 2nd.

Rivera needs D talent. Luke is BPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem drafting Keuchly if the team is doubtful about Beason and Davis' return. It's actually a really smart move IMO.

The issue I took is with the comment that he would play over Anderson. That, in my opinion, is a pretty radical statement.

Nothing is too out there for a BKJS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem drafting Keuchly if the team is doubtful about Beason and Davis' return. It's actually a really smart move IMO.

The issue I took is with the comment that he would play over Anderson. That, in my opinion, is a pretty radical statement.

Again, I would ask....was a rookie Beason a better LB than current day Anderson? Luke won't ride the bench with a 80% Beason, Anderson, and random guy inserted into the WLB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I would ask....was a rookie Beason a better LB than current day Anderson? Luke won't ride the bench with a 80% Beason, Anderson, and random guy inserted into the WLB.

To be fair to Anderson he didn't get a fair chance until injuries occurred, but to answer your question... yes, Beason was a better rookie than a current day Anderson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do be fair to Anderson he didn't get a fair chance until injuries occurred, but to answer your question... yes, Beason was a better rookie than a current day Anderson.

You think Beason was a better prospect coming out than Luke? He wasn't...So why wouldn't Luke be better than just a guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was the better prospect Aaron Curry or Luke....answer it.

Luke.

Don't confuse someone labeling one player safe and slotted at position x in one draft as meaning they are better than someone in another draft.

Also, Curry and Luke are different LBs. Simple and plain. Different strengths/weaknesses.

All I watch practically is ACC football...how much of Luke have you seen the past few years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kuechly is weird. He's not a hitter, not very aggressive and has a lot of mop up plays. He does have elite instincts and is really really smart with a good work ethic. The Anti-Burfict.

Anyways, I don't see the value where we pick. Trading back? Sure. At #9? Ehhhh... There's a dearth of first round LB talent this year and Kuechly is benefiting greatly from it. There's a TON of talented guys outside of the first we could grab.

I mean, if you were the Patriots, would you grab Mayo top ten again?

I do think it's sort of funny that a lot of the "combine means nothing, look at the tape" guys reverse field when it comes to Kuechly. Pre-combine, watching his games (not film, I don't have film and neither do you) he doesn't look super athletic, doesn't look like a 4.5 guy.. he looks like a classic MLB who makes a lot of tackles and doesn't do much else well. Then he blows up at the combine and now he's a freak-cyborg who can play any LB position, blitz like a pro, cover any TE, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • they have the best defense they've had in a long time...probably the best in the reid/mahommes era.  but i think they are probably the most beatable they've been in a while as well. record doesn't exactly bear that out, but they just don't look as strong on offense as they usually do. lots of reasons for that, like trying to build chemistry with newer receivers, but right now they just aren't as frightening as they typically are. i mean they'll probably win tomorrow, but i don't see them as the strongest team in the AFC right now. 
    • He will likely remain unsigned the remainder of this season(barring someone being in a pure QB panic AND making poor decisions) largely due to the cost. I do think he will get multiple offers to be a backup QB and perhaps a couple to potentially start this offseason.  I will continue to beat the same horse over and over.....he should go to a successful team with an established starter. If I were him, go to somewhere like SF, LAR, etc. Somewhere with a successful QB coach and brilliant offensive mind and ALSO a set situation at QB. Ride the pine and adjust for a year or two. Chill and be around better culture. I would suggest the same for Bryce but he will be limited to wherever we can trade him. 
    • I dont think the clock has started yet on canales.  Once he gets his guy then the pressure starts.  WFNZ/mike kaye said  yesterday that he thinks there are 4 options here regardless of bryces status, Geno, Fields, Wilson maybe Jones.
×
×
  • Create New...