Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The illusion of needing another WR


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#46 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 26,268 posts

Posted 14 July 2012 - 09:27 PM

The point is not about "what if" someone goes down or gets hurt. ANYBODY could get hurt... and we have to adapt. And its not like Steve Smith hasnt been hurt before.



Last time Smitty was seriously hurt and misses extensive time...he wasn't the unquestioned best WR on the team.

We had Moose in his prime. 16 TDs, 1400+ yards....Which at the time was the greatest season by a WR in franchise history

We could handle it then

#47 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,573 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 14 July 2012 - 09:32 PM

Welker was not a reject. The Pats traded a 2nd and a 7th round pick for him. That is actually a high price to pay in a trade.

At least have your facts straight.


Thank you. I could not remember what the trade was. The Pats wanted him, obviously. Maybe J. Adams can become our Welker?

#48 MasterAwesome

MasterAwesome

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 440 posts

Posted 14 July 2012 - 09:46 PM

You don't gage how well off you are at a position based on how you would fare if your best player at that position got injured....otherwise 90% of the league would be insufficient at QB. I don't see people panicking about us needing to sign another QB in case Cam gets injured. You have to expect a certain drop-off in production if your best player at said position gets injured....chances are, you're not going to be able to adequately replace him, you just have to make due with what you have. We have enough weapons on offense that if, God forbid we lose Steve Smith to injury, we can look elsewhere. I'm sure we can manage to find SOMEONE open between LaFell, Gettis (assuming he's the #3), Olsen, Tolbert, and whoever would end up being our slot receiver if Smith goes down. Not to mention that we have an already amazing run game that we can fall back on if we lose Smith. We're not going to need that one guy step up as the #1 receiver, but rather we're gonna need everyone to step up on offense.

#49 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Gonna live and die as a faithful Panther Fan

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,477 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 14 July 2012 - 10:23 PM

We already had a running game in my opinion, we just improved it. Delhomme was Delhomme. We don't have to release any of our guys for a bust. Who would rubber stamp that? You obviously don't take time to analyze the point of what anyone else is saying, much less yourself.


Improved it? I guess you are right. Only one way to go when you are 25th in the league in Rushing in 2002. Wow, I am glad the Panthers don't subscribe to your standards.

http://www.nfl.com/s...=2&d-447263-n=1

Just so everyone knows. Davis, Delhomme and Proehl all signed in 2003.

Davis signed with the Carolina Panthers for the start of the 2003 NFL season

In the 2003 offseason, he (Jake Delhomme) met with representatives from both the Carolina Panthers and the Dallas Cowboys.[He eventually signed with Carolina as a free agent.

(Ricky Proehl) signed with Carolina as a free agent at the start of the 2003 season.
Proehl had 27 catches for 389 yds and 4 TDs (1st one agreed one of the greatest plays in Panther history)
A clutch player no doubt. A totally different situation. We didn't have anyone other than Smitty and Moose. Smitty just came of his first decent season. 824 yds in 2002. We also signed Kevin Dyson that season too.


(all sources Wikipedia)

I got your fuging point. I don't subscribe to it and it is a waste of time and money on a position we don't really need. Let who we have fight it out.

YES you do have to cut someone.If you bring in a former bust to our roster or a Vet WR, no matter what, you have to cut someone. Our 90 roster is set.

We went down that road before with Rod Gardner. Gave up a 6th round draft choice for him, wasted a spot in training camp and eventually the 53 man roster. He did nothing for us.

No Thanks

#50 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,732 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 14 July 2012 - 11:28 PM

Welker was not a reject. The Pats traded a 2nd and a 7th round pick for him. That is actually a high price to pay in a trade.

At least have your facts straight.


You think that Miami would have let Welker get away if they had known that he could be so productive? In the purest sense of the word, you are correct, but I am not talking semantics. Just goes to show you that one man's "trash" is another one's "treasure", and that's really the point.

#51 Real Emotional Trash

Real Emotional Trash

    I

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 292 posts

Posted 14 July 2012 - 11:59 PM

You think that Miami would have let Welker get away if they had known that he could be so productive? In the purest sense of the word, you are correct, but I am not talking semantics. Just goes to show you that one man's "trash" is another one's "treasure", and that's really the point.


That's really not the point, because as it was clearly pointed out, Welker was had for a 2nd round pick. Do you think Wes Welker would produce the same way in a place like Pittsburgh? He thrives in a system, and he would have never produced like that in Miami.

I came in here assumably to find you arguing about the validity of Mike Williams in multiple topics, and surprise. Mike Williams has never had more than 2 receiving touchdowns in his career.

Let's call up Matt Jones because he hasn't been given enough chances to prove how good he is.

#52 KillerKat

KillerKat

    Top Banana

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,651 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 12:02 AM

With Cam Newton as our QB, he can make any receiver look good. Just like the Pats and Tom Brady. How many receivers have the Pats had that were great because of Brady, but then were crap after they left? This is why WR is not a need even in the slightest here.

#53 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,670 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 15 July 2012 - 12:50 AM

lafell is a fine number two wideout.

#54 top dawg

top dawg

    The Creative Cat

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,732 posts
  • LocationWITHIN MY MIND'S EYE

Posted 15 July 2012 - 12:54 AM

That's really not the point, because as it was clearly pointed out, Welker was had for a 2nd round pick. Do you think Wes Welker would produce the same way in a place like Pittsburgh? He thrives in a system, and he would have never produced like that in Miami.

I came in here assumably to find you arguing about the validity of Mike Williams in multiple topics, and surprise. Mike Williams has never had more than 2 receiving touchdowns in his career.

Let's call up Matt Jones because he hasn't been given enough chances to prove how good he is.


To me it's not even about Mike Williams when you get right down to the nitty gritty. I would have preferred Garcon, Manningham, Plax, Edwards, and probably some others to Williams. If you had really been listening as opposed to jumping into the middle of a conversation without all the facts, you would realize that I never said that the guys we have now can't or won't step up. Do I have some skepticism that they can handle the load with or without 89? Yes. Does it make me an insane or ignorant fan to think this, especially in light of history? I don't think so. Would I like for one of our guys to break out? Hell yeah! Do I believe that just because we give another veteran FA a look, does that mean a guy on our current roster will not evolve into the WR we have desperately needed? No, because I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Do I believe we will sign another vet? Probably not knowing the way our guys do business? No. Do I believe that the sky is falling because of it? No. As stated earlier, my main concern is the window of opportunity that Smitty has to win a championship because, the way I see it, right or wrong, our FO has failed to take advantage of Smitty's prowess while his window of greatness had just been opened.

#55 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 26,268 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:29 AM

You think that Miami would have let Welker get away if they had known that he could be so productive? In the purest sense of the word, you are correct, but I am not talking semantics. Just goes to show you that one man's "trash" is another one's "treasure", and that's really the point.


Miami got more in a trade for Welker than we could of got for Smith after 2010....so let's treat him like a chump. This also isn't comparing him to Smith so let's not go down that road.

Miami also had poo QB play when Welker was there...and didn't play to his strengths....but there is a reason NE gave up so much for him



#56 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 26,268 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:30 AM

lafell is a fine number two wideout.


He might be....he has never proven to be one though

#57 toldozer

toldozer

    finally someone fatter than Alice

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,211 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 04:37 PM

Lets see what gettis and adams can do then we can talk about a need. Or bring in guy after guy after guy after guy after guy after guy and give them exactly no chance to prove themselves before we bring in the next guy. Makes sense.

#58 La Pantera

La Pantera

    humpin' habanero

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,751 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 04:43 PM

Lets see what gettis and adams can do then we can talk about a need. Or bring in guy after guy after guy after guy after guy after guy and give them exactly no chance to prove themselves before we bring in the next guy. Makes sense.



All WRs not named smith will get their chance, because the Panther are not going to bring another wideout in...they believe in the guys.

#59 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,369 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 04:55 PM

Some of you have no perspective on how long it took for many of the better receivers in the nfl to develop and how Lafell stacks up. You would think that would be one of the first steps in formulating an opinion regarding the subject.

#60 toldozer

toldozer

    finally someone fatter than Alice

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,211 posts

Posted 15 July 2012 - 05:02 PM

But csx we only have one top five wr. We need 3 of them.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com