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!

     

Sadly I just don't see the room.


Kurb

Recommended Posts

We have some really cool projects/prospects this season.

Beavers and the Canda Kid.

Cptn Munerland and Hilee Tylor.. Etc.

Just seems too many people have "spots"

Runningback has -> Williams, Stewart, Hoover, Goodson, Fimmattea(sp)

Would we even take 5 Running backs into a game ?

Wide Reciever is another logjam.

Smitty, Moose, Jarrett, Robinson

Now Robinson isn't set in stone, however I think someone will have to blow away the competition to get that 4th jersey on game day. Not to mention Goodson could verywell be the "4th" WR so that Tony F can get out there.

Defensive End

Peppers, Brayton, Brown, Charles Johnson is a solid rotation.

Do you take a 5th DE just for situational use ? Is Brayton considered a DE/DT ?

CB is an even worse log jam.

Gamble, Marshall, Martin, Wesly.

Now most will quickly say move ole Weasly out of the way, but he made rememberable plays on Special Teams last year, and that say something that you can remember a Special Teams play.

We might have a rather stacked practice squad. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you call him Weasly on purpose? lol

These kinds of decisions are why I want preseason kept at 4 games, especially since they aren't panning on expanding the roster/PS (AND NFLE IS GONE MY PET PEEVE-ARGH!!). Coaches have no other type of game experience to evaluate on other than PS and can't keep too many projects around. I hate that.

It will be interesting to see who gets what reps where in TC. I am counting on you hawkeyed observers, you know who you are, to keep us geographically undesirable peeps in the know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I'd give it a C mainly because of Brooks.  If we just didn't have a 2nd I'd argue B to B+ tbh. Brooks was a bad gamble, tho one that could still pay off long term. Yes XL only has 400 yards but... Look who is throwing him the ball. And I think he isn't a "true #1" but he's been able to consistently get open. Hands definitely need to be cleaned up.  But he should end the year with 500-600 yards. Like you said - Sanders looks great.  Get him a better QB / more time with a QB and I think he's gonna impress. We added a couple rotational players on D that have both made plays and show promise for the future from later rounds. So I'd say, Brooks really hurts this drafts grade. It'll be interesting to see how it progresses over the next 3 years. I've overall really liked Morgan's FA acquisitions, so...
    • Oh he would absolutely flourish. It’s the panthers way. It’s no different with coaches. Sometimes they reach their expiration date, go somewhere else, and find new success.  Similarly to Burns, how long to wait for the light to finally turn on?  Market forces will demand a salary that the panthers can not responsibly match. Sliding him to guard will fit his skill set better, but he has played LT for 3 years. He will receive offers from other teams wanting to pay him LT money.  At guard, he won’t start with what they have paid Hunt and Lewis. Center then?? Dunno. Maybe? He will become a backup by default once they draft their stud LT. I doubt Dan just stands pat. That’s not his MO.  So where does this put him? Can you match what other teams will offer for a backup LT/guard? Do you dish out franchise LT $ on a guy who still needs significant improvement in pass protection. This team will be DOA in the playoffs with the very first team who has a formidable speed rusher. What if he has hit his ceiling in pass protection already and they sign him long term? It’s a big gamble either way. 
    • We're in a great position to see just how big of a misstep it would be, having made so many ourselves
×
×
  • Create New...