Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Archived

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

Cam2Ligit2Quit

Ted Ginn joins the Panthers on a one-year deal

Recommended Posts

First off Dork, I never said Cam acts or talks like a thug, in fact, he is the furthest from being a thug. What I said was, he needs to learn how to conduct himself like a grown man during interviews and act the leader of the team instead of a kid. That is why Denver ripped him apart and mocked him til I saw a tear drop in his eyes. As a NFL quarterback he is held to a higher standard.

As for that Kuechly thing, just wait and see if we don't upgrade the linebacker position and see him get torched on the 3rd and longs when the defense needs to get off the field. You will see how many games we let slip threw our fingers again before I pull up this thread and say that I was right. At that point I don't want to have to thump you from my pubs saying I told you so, but I will.

sure thing mr. "curtis lofton is a better linebacker in coverage than luke kuechly"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Oh I'm glad you use Tate as a example. So here's a few question.

1. Who is the number 1 WR in Seattle because Sid Rice had pretty much the same Stats as Tate 50rec. 748 yads and 7td on 80 targets? It's not as big as the difference here is where 89 got 60 more targets then Lafell. Rice only got only had 12 more targets then Tate.

2. You seem to neglect mentioning that Seattle didn't have other targets like a good TE and FB to throw to. Zach Miller had 35 rec. for 383 yards and 3 td. Now Compare that with Olsen who had 69 rec. 843 yards and 5 td. Also as a side bar Olsen was targeted 104 times which is 28 more times then Lafell. So if you really want to be technical about it Olsen was the #2 WR.

Also Tolbert caught 27 ball and was targeted 39 times compared to Michael Robinson (FB for the Seattle) who caught 13 balls on 16 targets. You don't think haveing more weapons could have effected Lafell numbers?

89 got that many more targets because he is simply better, gets open way more, and the QB trusts him more. In Seattle, the QB trusts the WR1 (Rice) about as much as the WR2 (Tate), and if you watch the film I don't blame him because he gets open more consistently than our guy.

Zach Miller is a good TE (just as many suspected), and as soon as Wilson (and probably Pete Carroll) got him more involved in the game in the postseason, his productivity increased accordingly. Regarding Tolbert, I consider him the best FB in the game, so I suppose it's possible that he poached some receptions from LaFell, but it is pretty understandable because he is a much better FB than LaFell is a WR, and has proven his unique roll to be of key value to the team. LaFell has not done that in my opinion. In regards to Olsen, he is a better TE than LaFell is a WR also, so really the same train of thought applies. I could argue that Olsen is being misused and that he should not be our de facto WR2, and that just because he can raise his game to that level doesn't mean that it is or should be his natural role, and stunts the natural balance of the offense because we are overcompensating for not having that other true threat at wide-out.

Like I said, LaFell is fine for what he does, but he is never gonna strike fear in the hearts of the opposition, particularly on anywhere near a consistent basis, because his game hasn't risen to the level where he is taken as a serious threat. It will be funny if we draft an Austin and he immediately comes here and has an impact, then people will see what type of WR2 that championship level caliber teams have. This impact will blur the lines between the WR1 and WR2, and give LaFell to shine as the WR3 that he really is---the guy that lulls defenses to sleep and gets a few, hopefully key, targets a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol curtis Lofton a coverage linebacker?

Lofton is the league epitome of a two down Lb. whoever would say such a thing clearly has no business offering up their opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was also the only receiving TD he had that season. (he had two as a kick returner)

Yeah, but that alone tells you he has the speed to beat Db's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

89 got that many more targets because he is simply better, gets open way more, and the QB trusts him more. In Seattle, the QB trusts the WR1 (Rice) about as much as the WR2 (Tate), and if you watch the film I don't blame him because he gets open more consistently than our guy.

Zach Miller is a good TE (just as many suspected), and as soon as Wilson (and probably Pete Carroll) got him more involved in the game in the postseason, his productivity increased accordingly. Regarding Tolbert, I consider him the best FB in the game, so I suppose it's possible that he poached some receptions from LaFell, but it is pretty understandable because he is a much better FB than LaFell is a WR, and has proven his unique roll to be of key value to the team. LaFell has not done that in my opinion. In regards to Olsen, he is a better TE than LaFell is a WR also, so really the same train of thought applies. I could argue that Olsen is being misused and that he should not be our de facto WR2, and that just because he can raise his game to that level doesn't mean that it is or should be his natural role, and stunts the natural balance of the offense because we are overcompensating for not having that other true threat at wide-out.

Like I said, LaFell is fine for what he does, but he is never gonna strike fear in the hearts of the opposition, particularly on anywhere near a consistent basis, because his game hasn't risen to the level where he is taken as a serious threat. It will be funny if we draft an Austin and he immediately comes here and has an impact, then people will see what type of WR2 that championship level caliber teams have. This impact will blur the lines between the WR1 and WR2, and give LaFell to shine as the WR3 that he really is---the guy that lulls defenses to sleep and gets a few, hopefully key, targets a game.

And again all I get from you is opinion no stats. 89 was triple and double covered some times but he was always open from your view.

I bring stats to this debate can you please do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what the Gettleman is cooking. With limited cap space, he has resigned the Captain, brought in a DT (Cole), a safety (Mitchel)

a KR/PR and #3 wr (Ginn), 2 CBS (Florence and DJ Moore, and a RB (Armond Smith). More than Hurney ever did with more room to spend. Looking foward to the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said earlier if we could get Booth and Alan Branch I would be hyped beyond belief.

If he signs both a guard and a defensive tackle, people are gonna start sacrificing virgins to him :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhhh, just think... If Marty would have ponied up a little more cash for Jacoby Jones, we wouldn't even be having this Ted Ginn conversation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because I said Dork, doesn't mean your avatar really translates your personality.

sure thing mr. "curtis lofton is a better linebacker in coverage than luke kuechly"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he signs both a guard and a defensive tackle, people are gonna start sacrificing virgins to him :lol:

He did sign a DT, Colin Cole. Risky that he could regain form, but he was decent before injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And again all I get from you is opinion no stats. 89 was triple and double covered some times but he was always open from your view.

I bring stats to this debate can you please do the same.

Yeah, you brought stats. Stats that don't really prove anything. Bottom line: The stats prove my argument which is that LaFell doesn't have the production of top WR2s in the league, much less a WR1-2 hybrid. Your stats are really not even relevant to the argument IMO, just some convoluted rationale to over hype and over value a guy that has proven to be mediocre. But don't worry, Gettleman is going to up the game, which will ultimately prove everything that I have said (not that you really need any more proof).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you brought stats. Stats that don't really prove anything. Bottom line: The stats prove my argument which is that LaFell doesn't have the production of top WR2s in the league, much less a WR1-2 hybrid. Your stats are really not even relevant to the argument IMO, just some convoluted rationale to over hype and over value a guy that has proven to be mediocre. But don't worry, Gettleman is going to up the game, which will ultimately prove everything that I have said (not that you really need any more proof).

No your not being rational.

1. You refuse to notice the pattern of no #2 in a option type Offense putting up great numbers.

2. You refuse to add in the fact of Olsen and Tolbert taking away touches from lafell.

3. You also refuse to see that Smith didn't put up great numbers this year either.

All you have is this opinion that Lafell wasn't getting open and he is a sub par Wr. Again with no stats or film to back that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Santana Moss 41 receptions, 573 yards and 8TDs > LaFell's 44, 677, and 4 (and he's not even a starter).

Pierre Garcon who had a bad foot had numbers similar to LaFell, 44, 633 and 4.

The Leonard Hankerson, WR extraordinaire (sarcasm), even put up 38, 543 and 3 on 19 less targets.

Blame it on the read option all you want. That's really the only argument that you can cling onto at this point,. LaFell really had the the same or less impact of an old guy who was not a starter, and a guy on a bad foot can equal the production of your prized WR2. He was a little better than another guy who was not a starter, but who arguably was supposed to have his break out year also, but turned out to be a mediocre WR just like LaFell. Like I said, the stats really just prove what I've been saying all along. Moreover, if I had film of LaFell, I would have to bring my pillow because I'd probably fall asleep. It would be named The Disappearing Man.

Regarding Olsen and Tolbert, I already answered it, but let me make it simple: Good players rise to the occasion, so LaFell is not going to get a pass because he doesn't warrant more attention because of his inability to get open and make a great impact upon the game. Oh, he is a mediocre WR whose job is to catch the ball, but because he doesn't do his job as effectively as more than a few others, he loses touches to the TE and the FB. OK.

Smith's numbers were still decent, notwithstanding the fact that LaFell couldn't break out and command the attention of defenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



×