Archived

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

Dpantherman

Panthers begin background work on Fairley

119 posts in this topic

Define: cloums 

My bad, coLumns. Sometimes the fingers type too fast and letters get switched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully expect this guy to be our pick as long as nothing comes up as far as character or in the pre-draft process.

...and I fully expect the expectations to be way to high for him and for us to look back on that pick and give a few shoulda woulda couldas. This guy is the focus of the biggest hype train I have seen since the JaMarcus Russell pick.

If we don't at least try to trade back then IMO we are going to regret it. We have too many needs on the offensive side of the ball to take this kid #1 overall. So unless we get a playmaker at QB via free agency and probably a receiver as well then there is no way I am on board with taking a DT at #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy brings a nasty streak, I love that!

I would love a mean mentality in the trenches

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laetita is a bot. this thread was made first. I'm surprised u haven't figured this out by now.

whatever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whatever

back at ya. just stating the obvious didnt mean for it to come off as it did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't follow the logic on not taking X position number 1 overall... With my hindsight goggles, given the opportunity, I'd take Polomalu #1, Fitzgerald #1, Suh #1, Aso#1, etc. In a few years from now, I'll be saying the same thing about another player from this draft that wasn't taken #1. Point being, you can't say to me that if you knew how let's say, Champ Bailey was going to be, and in the draft, he's there at number 1 overall alongside Ryan Leaf and Robert Gallery, you'd take OT or QB over CB in that scenario. #1 should be BPA, where the P stands for player, not position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

back at ya. just stating the obvious didnt mean for it to come off as it did.

we're good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love a mean mentality in the trenches

Apparently a nasty streak equates to a dirty player to some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently a nasty streak equates to a dirty player to some.

Go figure. Granted, I don't want him going all Haynesworth and cleet-stomping a dude, but playing nasty is a good thing (esp for a DT). It's energetic and prideful, and something we need to go along with the agressive approach RR wants to run. No more helping the opponent up after a play. Play with respect, but also hate the opponents guts until that whistle blows.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go figure. Granted, I don't want him going all Haynesworth and cleet-stomping a dude, but playing nasty is a good thing (esp for a DT). It's energetic and prideful, and something we need to go along with the agressive approach RR wants to run. No more helping the opponent up after a play. Play with respect, but also hate the opponents guts until that whistle blows.

Can't find a single idea here I disagree with.

Rep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites