Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Kuechly


  • Please log in to reply
233 replies to this topic

#226 Peppers90 NC

Peppers90 NC

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,077 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 10:19 AM

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

We had the 9th pick. Not number 8. And at that spot Kuechly was the best defensive player on the board and we had two LBs coming off terrible injuries. Slowest learner? First of all Joe Adams hasn't sniffed the offense because he doesn't know the play book. (several preseason plays he didn't know where to line up and had to be directed by someone). Kuechly was making tons of tackles when he played every snap during preseason because he was apart of the game...now with the Davis being a factor Kuechly has had limited snaps and is asked to take on FBs....

He's a stud. Don't worry about him.

the dude is trolling, whether he knows it or not

#227 Rubi

Rubi

    Squid Smasher

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,338 posts
  • LocationCharlotte

Posted 18 September 2012 - 12:04 PM

the dude is trolling, whether he knows it or not


Or someone farted on his pillow last night and he's irritated

#228 FirstRoundPick

FirstRoundPick

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 979 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 07:24 PM

Okay, call it an issue, not a question. You obviously were not supportive of the Kuechly pick and questioned Hurney's strategy. I used Fletcher Cox as an example of someone many wanted pre-draft, including me.

But yes, I do have a question. Who would you have picked, and how would you have addressed the weakside linebacker position?



Pretty easy to know criticize my picks but whatever. Clabourne, Cox, Brockers, Coples, Jones, and maybe Blackman depending on any inside info I would have on Gettis, are people I would have targeted at that spot. So based on how it went down, I would have picked Cox or traded down. McClain was slated to start, and everyone was saying McFua was fine. DT was a weakness, but we have a short term fix for now.

LBer pretty much addressed itself Beason, Anderson, Davis who we have invested in is who I would relied on at the LBer spot if I was stuck in that position. If one of them went down, I would have no problem with Phillips or Senn starting a season, if another one went down, Hurney would have me beat me, but that goes back to the argument of how much do you really want to invest in a postion like LBer, and how smart it is to do so. Only two of them are going to be on the field half the time anyway.

I really hope noone uses a LB injury argument because common sense will tell you that applies for DT's too. Just like we didn't know how Davis, and Beason would respond, we had no idea how an old DT who never played in our system would respond either. And we are in bad shape if one of the Edwards go down in a more essential position too.

#229 FirstRoundPick

FirstRoundPick

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 979 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 07:43 PM

Cox hasn't made a huge impact yet, and neither has Coples.
I guess lot of folks think that we would be headed straight to the Superbowl if we had gone with Fairley in the first last year and Cox in the first this year.
Yeah..2 first round DTs is all that Jimmy needed to guarantee success.


I'm glad you aren't making arguments for my side if you are going to have huge hole in your arguments like that.

Clausen = huge weakness
QB > DT
QB most important position by far.

There were apologist that draft too who said Clausen was fine and he deserves another shot, and they wanted a DT. I only wanted DT's after going though a year of McFua, and getting a QB. I don't apologize for sub-par play, and believe we have to be real good in multiple places to get to the SB. Pretty much in this order QB, Pass rush, Corners, WRs, Protection, everything else. Good luck mocking that argument.

#230 bleys

bleys

    Simple and Plain

  • ALL-PRO
  • 15,535 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:38 PM

Pretty easy to know criticize my picks but whatever. Clabourne, Cox, Brockers, Coples, Jones, and maybe Blackman depending on any inside info I would have on Gettis, are people I would have targeted at that spot. So based on how it went down, I would have picked Cox or traded down. McClain was slated to start, and everyone was saying McFua was fine. DT was a weakness, but we have a short term fix for now.

LBer pretty much addressed itself Beason, Anderson, Davis who we have invested in is who I would relied on at the LBer spot if I was stuck in that position. If one of them went down, I would have no problem with Phillips or Senn starting a season, if another one went down, Hurney would have me beat me, but that goes back to the argument of how much do you really want to invest in a postion like LBer, and how smart it is to do so. Only two of them are going to be on the field half the time anyway.

I really hope noone uses a LB injury argument because common sense will tell you that applies for DT's too. Just like we didn't know how Davis, and Beason would respond, we had no idea how an old DT who never played in our system would respond either. And we are in bad shape if one of the Edwards go down in a more essential position too.



I had to laugh at "maybe Blackmon"... lol

#231 Rubi

Rubi

    Squid Smasher

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,338 posts
  • LocationCharlotte

Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:49 PM

Pretty easy to know criticize my picks but whatever. Clabourne, Cox, Brockers, Coples, Jones, and maybe Blackman depending on any inside info I would have on Gettis, are people I would have targeted at that spot. So based on how it went down, I would have picked Cox or traded down. McClain was slated to start, and everyone was saying McFua was fine. DT was a weakness, but we have a short term fix for now.

LBer pretty much addressed itself Beason, Anderson, Davis who we have invested in is who I would relied on at the LBer spot if I was stuck in that position. If one of them went down, I would have no problem with Phillips or Senn starting a season, if another one went down, Hurney would have me beat me, but that goes back to the argument of how much do you really want to invest in a postion like LBer, and how smart it is to do so. Only two of them are going to be on the field half the time anyway.

I really hope noone uses a LB injury argument because common sense will tell you that applies for DT's too. Just like we didn't know how Davis, and Beason would respond, we had no idea how an old DT who never played in our system would respond either. And we are in bad shape if one of the Edwards go down in a more essential position too.


Responding to the Edwards/injury/old statement you made....

I don't think you can compare a triceps injury to a ruptured Achilles or a 3 time shredded ACL.



#232 Rubi

Rubi

    Squid Smasher

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,338 posts
  • LocationCharlotte

Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:50 PM

Out of those names Jones would be the only name I'd consider

And Claiborne was gone by the time we picked

#233 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,664 posts

Posted 19 September 2012 - 08:41 AM

Pretty easy to know criticize my picks but whatever. Clabourne, Cox, Brockers, Coples, Jones, and maybe Blackman depending on any inside info I would have on Gettis, are people I would have targeted at that spot. So based on how it went down, I would have picked Cox or traded down. McClain was slated to start, and everyone was saying McFua was fine. DT was a weakness, but we have a short term fix for now.

LBer pretty much addressed itself Beason, Anderson, Davis who we have invested in is who I would relied on at the LBer spot if I was stuck in that position. If one of them went down, I would have no problem with Phillips or Senn starting a season, if another one went down, Hurney would have me beat me, but that goes back to the argument of how much do you really want to invest in a postion like LBer, and how smart it is to do so. Only two of them are going to be on the field half the time anyway.

I really hope noone uses a LB injury argument because common sense will tell you that applies for DT's too. Just like we didn't know how Davis, and Beason would respond, we had no idea how an old DT who never played in our system would respond either. And we are in bad shape if one of the Edwards go down in a more essential position too.


Claiborne and Blackmon were gone. Cox would have been a good pick imo, but it would have required we go into the FA market for a will LB. There is no way we could go into the season counting on TD, and frankly, we still aren't. His snaps are being limited severely. As for Beason, I love the guy and expect to see the old Jon before the season is over, but so far he has not quite been himself. I see a guy that is still thinking about the injury, and is a bit tentative.

Dwan has played well and should continue to be solid. Cox would have had the advantage of youth and should have a much higher upside than Dwan.

We could have gone either way and been justified. I just think it's way too early to make any kind of judgement on Luke given that he's playing a new position, and adjusting to the speed of the game.

Time will tell.

#234 usmcpanthers

usmcpanthers

    Professional Lurker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationTampa, FL

Posted 19 September 2012 - 08:54 AM

I havent read 16 pages...but why the heated debate. Luke is a good pick, he only has played two games. He will learn under Beason and Davis and will be a great linebacker.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com