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!

     

Connor Vs. Kuechly

xtheronx

By xtheronx,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Peppers90 NC Community Regular

Peppers90 NC

Posted
Posted

great point .. if our LB's are at full-strength this year .. watch out! Adding Kuechly hopefully accomplished more than simply upgrading the position .. hopefully it will allow us to make sure Beason, etc are healthy BEFORE they take the field this season!

Welcome aboard!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mother Grabber Grand Master

Mother Grabber

Posted
Posted

What OP is saying is that he'd rather we:

  • drafted Cox and keep Connor, giving us 9 at DE and a 4 at LB
  • instead of dumping Connor and drafting Keechly, giving us a 0 at DE and a 10 at LB

I get where you're coming from with this, but the draft isn't over, yet. Patience Daniel-san, it was just the first round. We can't judge the artwork until it's finished.

For example, how would you feel if we drafted Curry next? Would you prefer Cox and Connor to Keechly and Curry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtheronx Newbie

xtheronx

Posted
  • Author
Posted

For example, how would you feel if we drafted Curry next? Would you prefer Cox and Connor to Keechly and Curry?

Yeah .. but we would have Cox, Connor and whatever our next pick would be .. keeping Connor would have afforded us an additional pick to use elsewhere .. possibly allowing us to solidify our LB's with a later-round pick ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtheronx Newbie

xtheronx

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Kuechly always being compared to Dan Conner, or Brian Urlacher or Dan Morgan is a racist as Cam always being compared to Michael Vick or RG3.

Roethlisberger is a better comparison for Cam. Are there any non-white LBs that Kuechly plays like?

again ..

in the OP there was no comparison of the two

this post is about us letting a decent LB walk and using our draft pick to fill a position that was decently filled to begin with

just because they happen to both be cornbread is irrelevant

my argument is that if we re-signed Connor .. and used our #9 pick in another (more dire) area of need .. we would have likely been better off IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeoreDX Newbie

DeoreDX

Posted
Posted

A MLB who can cover the middle 3rd is invaluable to a 43 defense. It frees the up the safeties to maintain more leverage on the outside which in turns frees up the corners to maintain more leverage in the flats. Conner didn't have the range you need in the NFL to cover that middle 3rd effectively. He was horrible covering his middle 3rd zone. Urlacher's ability to cover that middle 3rd was one of the biggest reasons Chicago was so successful as a D in the 2k's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtheronx Newbie

xtheronx

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A MLB who can cover the middle 3rd is invaluable to a 43 defense. It frees the up the safeties to maintain more leverage on the outside which in turns frees up the corners to maintain more leverage in the flats. Conner didn't have the range you need in the NFL to cover that middle 3rd effectively. He was horrible covering his middle 3rd zone. Urlacher's ability to cover that middle 3rd was one of the biggest reasons Chicago was so successful as a D in the 2k's.

Good point .. but

we have a MLB who can cover the middle 3rd (Beason)

I don't like the idea of moving Beason either .. why mess with a GREAT thing

Connor would have been there as insurance .. and we could have drafted an additional LB for insurance later

I just think we whiffed on an opportunity to make the team better as a whole versus being crazy strong a particular position

We need a solid D all around .. not just in a few positions

Keeping Connor and drafting another need would have helped the team more IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MadHatter Rookie

MadHatter

Posted
Posted

I never said reach for a player .. I was discussing the thought process of the FO

I'm sure we could have traded back .. being that approx 10 trades took place after our pick!

We may have been able to trade back. If you have a specific player you want, you should not trade back unless you are prepared to lose him .

Rivera needs stud lb's to run his system...he loved Kuechly...so we took him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

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