Jump to content


Member Since 30 Nov 2008
Last Active Yesterday, 05:45 PM

#3345855 Yes, Shaq was indeed the BPA

Posted by EightyNine on 01 May 2015 - 09:09 AM

7-8-1 with a tough schedule and winning the NFCS while playing a poo ton of rookies and second year guys and a QB that played on one leg and a broken back with no offseason. Yeah, again wrong in the best possible way.

Greg Hardy deal made sense at the time as it kept a pro bowl player on the team but had no long term commitments in order to make sure we can re-sign guys like Cam and Luke.

No one knew what was going to happen with Greg.


More importantly than that.. at the end of the year last year, I really think we were one of the best teams in the league..And that was in spite of all of the positions that people are criticizing Gettleman for not upgrading.


Its pretty amazing what you can do when your GM finds good fits from the lower half of the roster.  If you are looking for instant gratification, you are going to ride the roller coaster of having a good season followed by a bad one.

#3345735 Yes, Shaq was indeed the BPA

Posted by EightyNine on 01 May 2015 - 08:34 AM

Before I drank some of that snake oil that Gettleman was selling last year, I was of the opinion that Bell and Chandler were shaky at the very best, and I was also of the opinion that our wide receiving corps was extremely uninspiring and lacking. Well, I hate to tell you, I was correct on both accounts.


Everyone shared that opinion.. you arent special for thinking that.  And reaching on players or over spending in FA to fill those needs wouldnt have helped us long term.


As for the people making a big deal about Shaq not expecting himself to go in the first round.. I guarantee he was just trying to not set himself up for disappointment.  It has absolutely nothing to do with how he views himself. He is just not arrogant enough to ignore what others are telling him.

#3339906 Cam breaks down a play call and explains the audible.

Posted by EightyNine on 29 April 2015 - 09:49 AM

Is he giving away just a little too much info here?

#3339814 REPORT: Texans attempting to trade SS Swearinger

Posted by EightyNine on 29 April 2015 - 08:43 AM

If they don't want him it is probably for a reason. Buyer beware


I am also skeptical of players put on the trading block.. But I wouldnt write them off.  It worked with Olsen, right?

#3327941 What do you think NFL QBs prefer? Better weapons or better protection?

Posted by EightyNine on 20 April 2015 - 04:04 PM

We hear time and time again about how teams need to surround their QBs with weapons, but what do you think QBs actually prefer? For instance, if you had a 1 on 1 with Cam and asked him who he would rather have between a stud LT or a equally stud WR, what do you think he would prefer?

"Big men give you the chance to compete."


Everyone should hopefully know the answer to this question.  Without protection, you have no chance.

#3327933 This Devin Funchess guy...(WR Michigan)

Posted by EightyNine on 20 April 2015 - 03:56 PM

Cam has a more accurate deep ball than Tom Brady has ever had. And Brady has done pretty well with himself.


Lets not get carried away..

#3327910 This Devin Funchess guy...(WR Michigan)

Posted by EightyNine on 20 April 2015 - 03:39 PM

I'm telling you not to be shocked if the Panthers grab him in the second round.

Benjamin, Funchess, Olsen...

That's a whole lot of red zone threat.


I dont want us to draft a number 2 WR because he's a redzone threat.  The majority of the throws Cam needs to make arent jump ball type throws.  We need someone who runs great routes, can get separation, and has good hands.  I feel like we have Kelvin to make those splash plays, and now we need someone who gets open underneath consistently.  Greg Olsen is tall, but I dont think he plays that tall.. He just runs great routes and has great hands and is really smart.  I want another WR who can do that.  Most of the top quarterbacks in the league have that guy that always gets open underneath. Old trusty..


Peyton and Brady had Welker..Now Brady has Edelman.  Aaron Rodgers has had guys that arent huge but are reliable at getting open underneath. Plaxico Burress (who played a role that I see for Kelvin) had Amani Toomer, who was consistent underneath. Fitzgerald had Boldin.  Most of the top offenses I can think of have receivers that each have their own roles in the offense.  I cant think of many top offenses that dont have diversity in their receivers' roles/playing styles.


Edit: I know I went back in time for some of those receiver references.. I dont know why those people were the ones that came to mind..

#3316859 RUMOR: Panthers looking to move up to 16-20th pick

Posted by EightyNine on 09 April 2015 - 11:51 AM

Tomatoe or tomato on that BPA argument. It's only worth arguing about in April, three weeks before thle draft.

Technically, effectively, philosophically, theoretically, or whatever, the goal is to get the player that you think is the best. If we trade up to do it, then I trust that Gettleman knows what he wants and what he's doing.

Yes, well..be that as it may.. I'm still gonna argue that "tomatoe" is incorrect..because it is.

#3316594 RUMOR: Panthers looking to move up to 16-20th pick

Posted by EightyNine on 09 April 2015 - 08:37 AM

I have to disagree. My idea of "BPA" is waiting to see what falls to you and selecting from your board the best overall talent. If your trading up for anyone that's not BPA because everyone is available for a price if your willing to move up. It completely contradicts the idea of sitting back and taking the best player.  Evem if it only costs you a 7th rounder your moving up because you believe that guy won't be there when you pick. Thats not BPA.

I don't understand your explanation of why trading up goes against BPA.  Trading has no effect on whether you select the player at the top of your board, or reach for someone that is lower on your board because they fill an immediate need.


I guess what you're saying is that by trading up, you arent selecting a player that would have been "available" to you.  But thats why you trade up.. So that those players would become available to you.  You move up because you think the value of the player you traded for is greater to your team than what you gave up to move up.  It still has no affect on whether or not you take the player at the top of your board.


All BPA means is that when youre on the clock, you arent going to pass up on your highest rated player just because you want someone who is rated lower that fills a need.  It would be possible to trade up and still not take the player at the top of your board because you want someone that fills a need and you think they wont be available when you pick.  That would go against BPA.  But as long as you take the player at the top of your board, you are sticking with the BPA philosophy.  If you are able to, try to give me an explanation of how making a trade would prevent you from taking the player rated highest on your board.

#3315843 RUMOR: Panthers looking to move up to 16-20th pick

Posted by EightyNine on 08 April 2015 - 03:41 PM

Jarrett, Clausen, Edwards, Brown, etc....all positions of high need, even though they kept falling Hurney had to get his hands on them.


Trading up to get Brown and Edwards, and was possibly shopping our 1st to move up that year to get Pickles.  He absolutely drafted for need moreso than BPA.


Just my opinion though.


Yeah, you're probably right.


I'm sure the more your team loses, the harder it is to stick with the BPA philosophy.

#3315538 RUMOR: Panthers looking to move up to 16-20th pick

Posted by EightyNine on 08 April 2015 - 10:25 AM

There's not a player in this draft outside of the top-8 picks worth trading up for. I'll be pissed if we give up anymore than a 5th rounder to trade up, regardless of who it's for.


I don't know what type of credentials you have, but when people make comments like this, I can't help but think they are delusional about how much they think they know.

#3308537 Jerry Richardson... A man of the fans!

Posted by EightyNine on 01 April 2015 - 10:49 AM

Your always a winner


Thanks, man.


In all seriousness, it seems like you are spending too much time trying to bash JR.  I'm not sure if you are on a mission to try to get people to dislike him, but it seems like it.  It looks like our team is heading down a better path right now, and your hate for JR is keeping you from seeing that he got us a GM that is doing things the right way.  Seems like youre a glass half empty kind of guy..


VERY few teams win consistently.  Like, basically only one team.  Is it because they all have owners that dont care about winning?

#3308449 Jerry Richardson... A man of the fans!

Posted by EightyNine on 01 April 2015 - 10:06 AM


His personal attacks are stupid, who cares.

Questioning whether he wants to win is stupid, even as a businessman it will make him more money.

Caring about money or the league more than the team, if you're successful who cares?

Good morals, crocodile tears? Who. fuging. Cares. He just the owner of a team not your daddy.

All those people are just hating for stupid reasons. Wanting to win doesn't matter to me one bit, but being able to win? THAT is a different argument. That is a valid argument to not like our owner. And above all that argument is backed evidence, not opinions. That is why I dislike Jerry, he is a losing owner, who applies losing methods, that is what his history shows.

In the past 20 years we rank in the bottom third of NFL teams looking at wins vs. losses. This is a fact. And if JR isn't cheap (which he's not) and spending all the money he can to win, and he does care about winning as a priority, and he's still failing...it just makes it worse.

thebigcat,  you pie'd this, but he is referring to you.  You are apart of the group that hates for stupid reasons.

#3259464 How much trust do you have in Gettleman/Rivera in Offensive Tackle evaluation?

Posted by EightyNine on 02 March 2015 - 09:24 AM

Matsko can't be left out of this discussion. with the junk he's had to work with, I'd say he can put together a solid unit. maybe his input should be considered more heavily


How do you know how much Matsko's input was taken into consideration?


For all we know, Matsko was constantly in Rivera's ear telling him how great he thought Nate Chandler and Byron Bell would be.


Rivera is not picking the starting lineup by himself.  They have tons of meetings and evaluations where they collectively discuss the development and performance of each player.

#3224150 Cam on DP Show this morning

Posted by EightyNine on 30 January 2015 - 12:27 PM

He's so bad at interviews.. I hope his teammates make fun of him all the time for it.  He needs a speech coach.  He tries way too hard.


It's funny that his response for the bad weather question was, "you have to psyche yourself out"