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!

     

Newton not to lead rushing with Panthers

SpeedOFLight

By SpeedOFLight,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

SpeedOFLight Collaborator

SpeedOFLight

Posted
Posted

I normally never post articles. Well I was bored at work and found this article concerning the rushing attack.  http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000214387/article/shula-cam-newton-wont-lead-panthers-rushing-again

 

 

 

I would truly like I offense to utlize our running backs. We don't have to throw out the option completely but show some balance on offense. I am not very high on seeing our QB hit on every play.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ace_Aladdin Newbie

Ace_Aladdin

Posted
Posted

Balance. Cam not leading the team in rushing does not mean he will not run at all.

 

Shula knows Cam better than any other coach on the team. Cam's running threat will still be there.

 

 

I agree....... he wan't be the leading rusher this year ( I expect one of the RBs to have 1,000 + yds  season ) but that doesn't mean he want rush for a good amount of yards............ i still expect him to have around 600-800yds this season....it might even increase with a better O-line , RBs and  improved receiving corp will giving opposing defense hard time due to multiple option to defend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRed Newbie

TheRed

Posted
Posted

I agree....... he wan't be the leading rusher this year ( I expect one of the RBs to have 1,000 + yds  season ) but that doesn't mean he want rush for a good amount of yards............ i still expect him to have around 600-800yds this season....it might even increase with a better O-line , RBs and  improved receiving corp will giving opposing defense hard time due to multiple option to defend.

 

Disagree with your numbers. Cam had 741 yards rushing last year. If we are to properly rediscover our running game through our RB's there is no way he can get more than 400-500 and still allow us to have a 1,000 yard rusher too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRed Newbie

TheRed

Posted
Posted

I agree....... he wan't be the leading rusher this year ( I expect one of the RBs to have 1,000 + yds  season ) but that doesn't mean he want rush for a good amount of yards............ i still expect him to have around 600-800yds this season....it might even increase with a better O-line , RBs and  improved receiving corp will giving opposing defense hard time due to multiple option to defend.

 

Not trying to single you out here sorry.

 

To elaborate further on the subject. I looked at the rushing leaders from last season. The only QB who had more rushing yards than Cam was Robert Griffin (815), and it's certainly arguable that this lead to his playoff injury.

 

The only other QB that was even close to Cam in the rushing stats was Russell Wilson with what I would consider for his abilities a reasonable number of yards at 489. Obviously this worked well for the Seahawks yes?

 

No other QB made the top 40 in rushing numbers.

 

That is where we need to be, and such goes back to what I was referring to as "balance".

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...