Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What have we really lost?


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#31 poorboysrev

poorboysrev

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 313 posts

Posted 15 March 2013 - 09:46 PM

If BPA is a DT/DE/CB/S....I expect that over WR.

Talk in NY right now is they might go DE with their 1st and they have JPP and Tuck. Keeps you from getting in a CJ debacle again.



Right on. Remember last year everyone flipped out when we took Kuechly over bigger need (DT,CB). But fact is he was a BETTER player than Fletcher Cox or Gilmore or Coples. We could all be happy or pissed on draft day and be wrong either way. And yes the CJ contract is insane...when can we restructure that? If Hardy plays lights out and Alexander develops it will give us options

#32 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    _Is it 1996 Yet?_

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,075 posts

Posted 15 March 2013 - 10:10 PM

Hard to lose much when you dont have much of anything with value.

#33 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,526 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 16 March 2013 - 12:24 AM

Hard to lose much when you dont have much of anything with value.


Curious choice of words. Vague, yet ominous. Well played sir.

#34 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,526 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 16 March 2013 - 12:37 AM

Right on. Remember last year everyone flipped out when we took Kuechly over bigger need (DT,CB). But fact is he was a BETTER player than Fletcher Cox or Gilmore or Coples. We could all be happy or pissed on draft day and be wrong either way. And yes the CJ contract is insane...when can we restructure that? If Hardy plays lights out and Alexander develops it will give us options


Which is why I would love for a DT to be the BPA at #14. If you want a dominant line, as we do, you have to perpetuate the cycle. When CJ is ready to go, we will already have his replacement. Normally I wouldn't go two years in a row on DL, I just feel that if we lose Dwan, we need to draft a DL to help replace him. Bring back Dwan and we don't need to go DL in the first.

But it all comes down to who Gettlemen feels is the Best Athlete when we pick? This will be his first draft. His first pick is going to be important. And he knows it. He has to get his era off to a great start by killing this draft. Pressure? Who feels pressure? Can you say pressure?

#35 poorboysrev

poorboysrev

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 313 posts

Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:48 PM

Which is why I would love for a DT to be the BPA at #14. If you want a dominant line, as we do, you have to perpetuate the cycle. When CJ is ready to go, we will already have his replacement. Normally I wouldn't go two years in a row on DL, I just feel that if we lose Dwan, we need to draft a DL to help replace him. Bring back Dwan and we don't need to go DL in the first.

But it all comes down to who Gettlemen feels is the Best Athlete when we pick? This will be his first draft. His first pick is going to be important. And he knows it. He has to get his era off to a great start by killing this draft. Pressure? Who feels pressure? Can you say pressure?


I understand that man. First round DT's have a HIGH bust rate and that scares me. Plus it seems like it usually takes them a couple years to develop and have any impact(Outside Suh). I 'm not saying we shouldn't take one but getting Cam and Kuechly the last 2 years and watching them dominate immediately has me spoiled. I just remember how high everyone was on last years DT class(I wanted Fletcher Cox) and I don't remember any of them doing much to stand out last year. Whoever we take I don't want a project at 1.

#36 SCP

SCP

    Crop Dusting Son of a Bitch

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,051 posts
  • LocationOn a Sales Call

Posted 16 March 2013 - 06:55 PM

Hard to lose much when you dont have much of anything with value.


This

#37 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,526 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 16 March 2013 - 11:05 PM

I understand that man. First round DT's have a HIGH bust rate and that scares me. Plus it seems like it usually takes them a couple years to develop and have any impact(Outside Suh). I 'm not saying we shouldn't take one but getting Cam and Kuechly the last 2 years and watching them dominate immediately has me spoiled. I just remember how high everyone was on last years DT class(I wanted Fletcher Cox) and I don't remember any of them doing much to stand out last year. Whoever we take I don't want a project at 1.


Fortunatley for us, he would not have to start. So we could bring him along, rather than throwing him straight into the fire.

Not sure I buy the bust rate for high DT picks. Sure there are very few that make a difference their rookie years. But usually, when you get those guys, they wind up being pretty good.

I just want the best athlete left when we pick. DT? Fine by me. WR or DB? Fine with me. As long as they are athletic, they make us better. And that is fine with me as well.

I am a tad worried about the Oline. So if we actually took one in the first I probably could talk myself into being fine with that one too.

#38 PiratePanther189

PiratePanther189

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,095 posts

Posted 16 March 2013 - 11:23 PM

Biggest loss is that we were a 7-9 team and haven't improved while others have. There's still time for that. We just need a few lucky bounces in the draft and we'll be fine.


This. Especially in the division...I mean it's clear that Atlanta is in it to win it right now and the Taints are in position to improve. And then you look around the NFC at teams like San Fran, Seattle, Philly, and Detroit...they're all getting stronger as well.

#39 poorboysrev

poorboysrev

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 313 posts

Posted 17 March 2013 - 01:18 AM

Fortunatley for us, he would not have to start. So we could bring him along, rather than throwing him straight into the fire.

Not sure I buy the bust rate for high DT picks. Sure there are very few that make a difference their rookie years. But usually, when you get those guys, they wind up being pretty good.

I just want the best athlete left when we pick. DT? Fine by me. WR or DB? Fine with me. As long as they are athletic, they make us better. And that is fine with me as well.

I am a tad worried about the Oline. So if we actually took one in the first I probably could talk myself into being fine with that one too.



I see your point. But IMO you need to see something early out of a 1st rd pick. Statistically if you go back and look at the last 10-15 yrs worth of 1st rd DT's they are the highest percentage of busts. With the Glenn Dorsey, Tyson Jackson's of the world. Of course that is a risk with any player but history just shows 1st rd DT are risky.
Like you I just want the BPA whether that's Dline, Oline, whatever. I want a WR but it looks like best value is 2nd rd unless we trade back . I think Rivera can do more with less on the defense than Shula can with the offense. That's why I tend to want oline, then WR. But of course couldn't be mad about a legit #1 corner, or monster DT. A probowl talent/star at any of several positions would make us better.

#40 cbully

cbully

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,573 posts

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:50 PM

we lost a awful playcaller which made us lose much possible success, also 2 less than average dbs. looking at it this way i may add we should look to slice away some replaceable vets on offense as well.

#41 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,526 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:53 PM

I see your point. But IMO you need to see something early out of a 1st rd pick. Statistically if you go back and look at the last 10-15 yrs worth of 1st rd DT's they are the highest percentage of busts. With the Glenn Dorsey, Tyson Jackson's of the world. Of course that is a risk with any player but history just shows 1st rd DT are risky.
Like you I just want the BPA whether that's Dline, Oline, whatever. I want a WR but it looks like best value is 2nd rd unless we trade back . I think Rivera can do more with less on the defense than Shula can with the offense. That's why I tend to want oline, then WR. But of course couldn't be mad about a legit #1 corner, or monster DT. A probowl talent/star at any of several positions would make us better.


Can't argue with any of that. With our needs we just have to add some athletes. Even in the later rounds we have to find some athletes.

I would feel better if Gettlemen was a College evaluator. Cuz that is the another area he is needing help to make his decisions. We drafted well last year, so I have some faith in the staff. But I just wish Gettlemen was a little bit more familiar with the draft.

Anyway you look at it. We are still young and learning. I would love to add some Vets to go along with the rookies. I want to be excited. Just doesn't seem to be happening as easily as I would like.

Still a bright future ahead though.

#42 MasterAwesome

MasterAwesome

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 432 posts

Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:07 PM

Can't argue with any of that. With our needs we just have to add some athletes. Even in the later rounds we have to find some athletes.

I would feel better if Gettlemen was a College evaluator. Cuz that is the another area he is needing help to make his decisions. We drafted well last year, so I have some faith in the staff. But I just wish Gettlemen was a little bit more familiar with the draft.

Anyway you look at it. We are still young and learning. I would love to add some Vets to go along with the rookies. I want to be excited. Just doesn't seem to be happening as easily as I would like.

Still a bright future ahead though.


With all due respect, what is your obsession with "athletes"? This is your third post on just this page clamoring for the top "athletes" in the draft. We all know athleticism doesn't automatically translate into good football. That's why the combine doesn't really alter draft position by a whole lot...or else these "Combine Warriors" like Margus Hunt would go in the top 5. Instead, last I heard he's a projected 2nd rounder.

Just trying to figure out your thought process.

#43 SOJA

SOJA

    Official Panthers Fan

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,605 posts

Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:35 PM

I really only hoped for a Gross restructure and a re-signing of Dwan ...neither of those has happened but Person said he expects a Gross restructure to come

#44 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,526 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:41 PM

With all due respect, what is your obsession with "athletes"? This is your third post on just this page clamoring for the top "athletes" in the draft. We all know athleticism doesn't automatically translate into good football. That's why the combine doesn't really alter draft position by a whole lot...or else these "Combine Warriors" like Margus Hunt would go in the top 5. Instead, last I heard he's a projected 2nd rounder.

Just trying to figure out your thought process.


When you are talking about the top 14 in the draft, you are talking about the top talent in the class. Some of those guys have more athletic ability than others. If you are talking comparable talent. I would take the better athlete.

Athletes bring flexibilty, playmaking ability, and that all important "Wow" factor.

Now if you are talking equal talent and athletic ability. Give me the harder worker. But in almost every case imaginable. You take the best athlete left on the board. I promise if you do this, your need for FA will diminish every year until you barely need them at all.

It also keeps your team stocked. Allowing you to focus on those athletes worth a bigger deal. Depth is what gives you that flexibilty. So if you are stacked with athletes, you should be in good shape cap wise as well, as talent wise.

IMHO, the team with the most athletes usually wins. If I have 20 athletes against your 15, who would you expect to win?

#45 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Member from WAAAYY Back

  • ALL-PRO
  • 3,297 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 17 March 2013 - 06:39 PM

The best players we lost was D. Edwards and C. Gamble. Edwards was using the "Teams have offered me longer deals" offers but hasn't signed. Which gives me the idea he is FOS. Just a smoke screen to get us to offer him a bigger contract. While I believe we should give him a two year deal it appears Gettlemen wants to keep his commitment to older players down.

I am surprised no one is barking up Gamble's tree. I realized he was injured but he is a quality CB. I know many dislike him but look at his completion rate against him when he was healthy.

I would like to see us re-sign D. Edwards, Bring in a skilled WR and a good offensive guard thru Free Agency.

There are quality DBs and DTs in the Draft.

What i would like to see is us Jettison, Clausen, and A. Edwards. Sad to say but Clausen and A.Edwards is a bust.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com