Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Panthers claim OT Jonathan Martin


jamos14
 Share

Recommended Posts

I understand he either is or may not be "that good" a player.

But since he's a player that can be CUT without owing him a damn dime if he is, indeed, not "that good", how can this be in any way construed as a "bad signing"?

Don't worry, you don't have to answer. I know you understand. I was just stating a rhetorical question for the moron troglodytes and brainless internet badasses.

 

I don't see it as a bad signing, but I think you know that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So all year people claimed that "anyone" would be better than what we have, but when we sign "anyone" they complain.

For those that aren't happy with this or the Oher signing who would you have signed? I didn't really notice many quality tackles hit the open market.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was Martin brutal in Miami or was it more so the whole "bullying" thing that led to him being traded?

I haven't paid attention to him specifically while watching any games so I have no idea. But his pre draft profile speaks highly of him. The 49ers giving up on him so soon isn't a good indication though.

Obviously worth a shot with the risk being so low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that much of Martins ability so this kinda worries me that Gman thinks he can help us a lot.

 

Makes me think Oher and Remmers are not as highly regarded as I hoped they might be, but if we can do something with no risk, then why not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's honestly pretty interesting just seeing this pairing play out. Canales’ offenses (Seattle, Tampa) are run-first, under-center, play-action systems built around defined reads and intermediate/deep timing throws. That structure worked when he had QBs like Baker Mayfield or Russell Wilson in a system that created clear launch points and sightlines. His success has always been tied to a credible run game + play-action gravity. You can see that with the Panthers team building philosophy as well. Coker and TMac both are bigger receivers that won't get the best YAC production but thrive as possession receivers in contested scenarios. They're not the best in space and creating additional yardage in such, and would likely fair better systematically with a stronger armed QB who can create better opportunities on those boundary 1v1 matchups with stronger throws. Bryce, on the other hand, is a spread-native QB. His strengths are rhythm, spacing, quick processing, and off-script creation. Asking him to live in condensed formations with long-developing play-action concepts just hasn't been his forte. And well, his boundary throws are limited in velocity which takes a big chunk of the playbook off. And I mean a QB like Bryce can still work, it's just Dave's offensive philosophy and foundation is very much at odds with Young's physical limits and his own experience. So it's certainly still a learning experience for Dave to figure out how he can mesh his offensive philosophy with Young's strengths. He's very inexperienced with maximizing Bryce's strengths with his system. Would love to see us bring in an OC with spread experience and adaptability to implement a cohesive system with Dave to allow Bryce to thrive, as it's obvious we're sticking with him for a bit longer.   
    • Only thing I really agreed with is questioning why we didn’t take any timeouts on their last drive.  I know hindsight is 20/20, but I think it would’ve saved clock bc they were desperate to score as soon as the opportunity presented itself, but I also think it could’ve helped the defense regroup and maybe give us a better chance to stop them.
×
×
  • Create New...