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!

     

People happy about us facing a depleted Giants team.

SmootsDaddy89

By SmootsDaddy89,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

JawnyBlaze Grand Master

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted

Yea, they aren't exactly depleted. They're missing their best receiver (which admittedly is not a small deal) but other than him no one of any really impact is sitting out. You could make an argument about their "starting" RB, Bradshaw, but they drafted a guy in the 1st I think they want to be their #1 anyway. Bradshaw's not bad but there's a reason they were last in rushing last year..and I wouldn't put it all on their O-line...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRed Newbie

TheRed

Posted
Posted

I'm not happy about anyone having injuries. Even with them banged up it will still be a close one I think.

With that said though. Last year with the injuries we had, you're dreaming if you think any other teams or fans cared about facing us full strength or not. I know a lot of people get caught up in that for some reason, I think it's just a ego thing. Sunday still comes regardless, and I don't know anyone who doesn't like winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmootsDaddy89 Enthusiast

SmootsDaddy89

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Even if most of the players who are sitting out aren't stars, they aren't impacting anything on the sideline. You can't just hope that all the teams you face are going to be missing about half a dozen key players each game. I still maintain I'd rather face a completely healthy Giants team than the one we're going to face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmootsDaddy89 Enthusiast

SmootsDaddy89

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would rather win, injuries happen. We have guys banged up too. We lost Beason and TD weeks one and two and our starting DT in training camp last year. fug respect, all that poo does not matter next week or the week after, only thing that is remembered is the W's.

and didn't we pretty much blame not getting to the playoffs on defensive injuries? That's the macrocosm of what's going to happen even if we win tomorrow night. Especially if it's remotely close.

"Welp the Giants didn't have Nicks or Bradshaw, a healthy Giants team probably wins this game hurrrrr"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Swaggasaurus Community Regular

Swaggasaurus

Posted
Posted

and didn't we pretty much blame not getting to the playoffs on defensive injuries? That's the macrocosm of what's going to happen even if we win tomorrow night. Especially if it's remotely close.

"Welp the Giants didn't have Nicks or Bradshaw, a healthy Giants team probably wins this game hurrrrr"

Then it will be forgotten next week. You want respect, pull for the Steelers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted

Who cares about respect? What we need are wins, like enough to get into the playoffs.

All you can play are the games you are presented with. Win them and then worry about stuff like respect in the offseason.

Now come on man. You know very well style points are the go to stat. You cannot quantify a victory without them.

Doesn't it help with the seeding for the playoffs? Or something important like that. You need all the style points you can get.

Nah, just win baby. Ugly, pretty, smooth, rough. They all add up the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmootsDaddy89 Enthusiast

SmootsDaddy89

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If you think a win against the Giants in their current state is cool, then you leave me no choice other than to assume you're a Duke fan and you are ecstatic with their 2009 national championship season when they played absolutely no one in the tourney the whole way through. I'm sorry. You've brought this on yourself.

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...