Archived

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

Gettleman expected to release Gamble

116 posts in this topic

Posted

Why yes i do.

Ken Lucas ring a bell (free agent)? Richard Marshall was good when he first got drafted (second round pick) he wasnt worth keeping was he? Sherrod Martin was drafted as a corner but he was a better safety so he got moved. Now he is FA who wont be resigned (second round pick). Not decent for you? That aint Gambles fault that Hurney never addressed the position right, is it Steve Smiths fault will still dont have a number 2 receiver?

what are you smoking? I was addressing your insinuation that gamble wasn't inconsistent. and then your evidence being that he has beaten out all of his competition we brought in... Richard marshall was a nick back, ken lucas was okay in seattle and poo a brick here. If steve smith was as much of a non factor as gamble, then i would say get rid of him but he still makes plays. and we have a perfectly fine #2, i think you meant next-#1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That sucks. I'm not a fan of the move, but seeing how the backups held it together when he went down, I don't see how we could justify holding onto him unless he restructured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

what are you smoking? I was addressing your insinuation that gamble wasn't inconsistent. and then your evidence being that he has beaten out all of his competition we brought in... Richard marshall was a nick back, ken lucas was okay in seattle and poo a brick here. If steve smith was as much of a non factor as gamble, then i would say get rid of him but he still makes plays. and we have a perfectly fine #2, i think you meant next-#1.

You asked me what decent DB PROSPECTS were brought in since Gamble has been here. Did you not? 2 second round picks, and Ken Lucas was a top free agent that year, he left Seattle because they didnt want to pay him what he wanted. Look it up, or why would we give him that much money if he was garbage? Its hard for a CB to make plays when teams dont throw their way. Dont you think Richard Marshall was only a nickel back because he was never good enough to be a number 2? Who uses second round picks on players they think cant become starters? He got replaced by Captain, that tells you how good he was. We had Lucas and Marshall and they both sucked. Not on the team today but Gamble was still here till now, "inconsistent" and all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I like Gamble. Best Cornerback we ever had.

BUT, our defense was pretty good last year without him so as much as it pains me, I agree with cutting him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If he only had one good year, what did he do his first couple years? What first round picks stick around this long that our only decent?

The D was better because the front seven was better. WE HAVE 2 OF THE BEST DEs in the league. Maybe 3 next year. The steelers have been consistently ranked in the top 5 of pass defense the last couple years and you really cant name anyone in their secondary outside of Polamalu. You can win with mediocrity in the secondary if you can get to the QB consistently, this is well known. Im not knocking it, i like our defense better like this. But Im not gonna discredit Gamble for being a great player tho. He would still be on the team if wasnt for cap issues.

I said he only had one very very good year....which is what he was paid to be.

Gamble hasn't been great. He has had the best CB career in Carolina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The reason our defense was ok was because we adjusted our game plan. If we get rid of Gamble, you are taking away our primary component to isolating a star receiver and shutting him down.

Im surprised that so many of you read past the strategy like this. "Oh well we were fine without him", yeah we were fine when we game planned without him a couple of times, but then again there were teams that exploited the poo out of it and thats what going to happen next year if we lose him. It will be a catastrophe in the secondary if he leaves. . . . . Bet that!

Good coaches will look at our D and go '. . soft spot. . . soft spot . soft spot. . . OH they have no corners who can cover and no safety to save them. Buh bye Panthers, a lttle run run play-action and boom goes the dynamite. '

You have to look at the causes and effects, not just the additions and subtractions of the equation. Good strategists adjust and use the tools they have, thats how battles are won. Without 2O, our strategy is going to press as much as you can with the front 7 and when that fails. . . we're fugged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You asked me what decent DB PROSPECTS were brought in since Gamble has been here. Did you not? 2 second round picks, and Ken Lucas was a top free agent that year, he left Seattle because they didnt want to pay him what he wanted. Look it up, or why would we give him that much money if he was garbage? Its hard for a CB to make plays when teams dont throw their way. Dont you think Richard Marshall was only a nickel back because he was never good enough to be a number 2? Who uses second round picks on players they think cant become starters? He got replaced by Captain, that tells you how good he was. We had Lucas and Marshall and they both sucked. Not on the team today but Gamble was still here till now, "inconsistent" and all.

Im not saying gamble hasnt been our best CB, thats just not saying much... Just because we draft a guy in the 2nd round, doesn't mean they are already "decent NFL DB's". Yea, we hoped and planned them to be but the truth is, no one [prior to this year] has shown any real promise as a starting DB in the NFL. So for Gambe to be our best DB ever is like saying john kasay has been our best kicker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The reason our defense was ok was because we adjusted our game plan. If we get rid of Gamble, you are taking away our primary component to isolating a star receiver and shutting him down.

Im surprised that so many of you read past the strategy like this. "Oh well we were fine without him", yeah we were fine when we game planned without him a couple of times, but then again there were teams that exploited the poo out of it and thats what going to happen next year if we lose him. It will be a catastrophe in the secondary if he leaves. . . . . Bet that!

Good coaches will look at our D and go '. . soft spot. . . soft spot . soft spot. . . OH they have no corners who can cover and no safety to save them. Buh bye Panthers, a lttle run run play-action and boom goes the dynamite. '

You have to look at the causes and effects, not just the additions and subtractions of the equation. Good strategists adjust and use the tools they have, thats how battles are won. Without 2O, our strategy is going to press as much as you can with the front 7 and when that fails. . . we're fugged.

I don't necessarily disagree; but, I would just say, there are very good teams with very strong DLs (DEs and DTs) which do not have anything more than average cornerbacks.

QBs can't through if they are on their back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He prob is going to sign with the Pats and be a pro bowler.

I think he'd be a good fit with Cason (provided he re-signs) in San Diego

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Im surprised that so many of you read past the strategy like this. "Oh well we were fine without him", yeah we were fine when we game planned without him a couple of times, but then again there were teams that exploited the poo out of it and thats what going to happen next year if we lose him. It will be a catastrophe in the secondary if he leaves. . . . . Bet that!

Good coaches will look at our D and go '. . soft spot. . . soft spot . soft spot. . . OH they have no corners who can cover and no safety to save them. Buh bye Panthers, a lttle run run play-action and boom goes the dynamite. '

You have to look at the causes and effects, not just the additions and subtractions of the equation. Good strategists adjust and use the tools they have, thats how battles are won. Without 2O, our strategy is going to press as much as you can with the front 7 and when that fails. . . we're fugged.

Gamble played in 4 games....it isn't like we adjusted for 2 games.

They had all season to do what you claimed....our D go better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gamble played in 4 games....it isn't like we adjusted for 2 games.

They had all season to do what you claimed....our D go better

yep.

again, we weren't any better or worse off with or without him, and this team has had plenty of time to get used to it.

he played last year and the defense was bad. he sat for most of the season and the defense was good. not saying he was the problem, just that he didn't impact things much on or off the field.

he is essentially just a guy. talented, but still just a guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gamble played in 4 games....it isn't like we adjusted for 2 games.

They had all season to do what you claimed....our D go better

we were 7 and 9. . what are you trying to say here?

edit: . . I mean odds n probabilities roll the way they will CRA, the dice fell and thats how they came out this year, but you are seriously putting stress on Ron to game plan without Gamble.

Double edit: you guys talk about how we were ok... yeah, ok we were in some situations but that didnt make the threat of getting OWNED in the secondary any less of a reality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites