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!

     

Despite recent trade, Panthers still in need of receiver help


Recommended Posts

Ah yes the old "they used to be good, so they must still be" logic. Lord knows that argument never fails.

Reality: Those guys aren't as good as you think they are. And if passing on them is some huge mistake, it sure seems like one an awful lot of teams were willing to make.

No. The old logic that since we can't make a big change, we may as well not make any changes at all. "Oh, they're no good because teams have passed on them" kinda logic, regardless if teams are light years ahead of us regarding receiving depth.  That makes no difference. Moreover, God forbid that Ricky Proehl can actually help make an ex-thousand yard receiver that flashed repeatedly in last season's playoffs just as good as he was when he went over 1000 yards.  Ricky Proehl would hate to work with a receiver who actually showed that he could consistently be near WR2 levels and possibly a WR1 on good days. We'll just keep fielding the double Bs and wonder why we''re bereft of TDs.

Gimme a break, Scot.

Edited by top dawg
Link to post
Share on other sites

No. The old logic that since we can't make a big change, we may as well not make any changes at all. "Oh, they're no good because teams have passed on them" kinda logic, regardless if teams are light years ahead of us regarding receiving depth.  That makes no difference. Moreover, God forbid that Ricky Proehl can actually help make an ex-thousand yard receiver that flashed repeatedly in last season's playoffs just as good as he was when he was when he went over 1000 yards.  Ricky Proehl would hate to work with a receiver who actually showed that he could consistently be near WR2 levels and possibly a WR1 on good days. We'll just keep fielding the double Bs and wonder why we''re bereft of TDs.

Gimme a break, Scot.

I'm more of the mind that just making any change because we've got to do something is kinda silly.

If you're gonna make a move, have a good reason to do it. And make sure it's  something that makes sense in the long term, not just the short term.

Basically, think like Gettleman, not like Hurney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm more of the mind that just making any change because we've got to do something is kinda silly.

If you're gonna make a move, have a good reason to do it. And make sure it's  something that makes sense in the long term, not just the short term.

Basically, think like Gettleman, not like Hurney.

Well, no one said that we've got to do something out of silliness. At least I know that neither myself, Proudiddy or CRA have suggested anything of the sort. What we've suggested, and have been suggesting, is to make changes that make sense.  Making changes that make sense, no matter how small, may marginally improve your situation, or just may surprise you with even more. 

Now, if you don't believe that it makes sense, then that's a different argument, but let's not be patronizing and make the discussion about someone being "silly".

Furthermore, sometimes you have to do things in the short term just to get by. This is especially true when a crisis happens. You may decide to ride it out, or you may decide to do something on a temporary basis in such a way that the long term really isn't affected. That is possible. Sitting by doing nothing can be just as silly and detrimental to the long term as your suggestion that making a useless move would have. 

Short term responsibilities and long term responsibilities can be mutually exclusive, but they don't have to be. It just depends on how one wants to manage the situation. 

Edit: Basically, you can think somewhere between Gettleman and Hurney, and still make things work and get to where you want to go.

Edited by top dawg
Link to post
Share on other sites

lakefront property in Florida ? Am I missing something? These are found everywhere down here.

 then I have a piece of lakefront property in Florida to sell you.  

 

If anything is done it will be after week one so a veteran won't count against the salary cap this year.

Edited by Captain Obvious
  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

lakefront property in Florida ? Am I missing something? These are found everywhere down here.

If anything is done it will be after week one so a veteran won't count against the salary cap this year.

Swamp land. Isn't it obvious?  LOL

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are we not looking at Joe Webb at WR? You know, since he's already here and has done it before? Just a thought.

It's entirely possible that they will again, after preseason's done.  He's on at least the PR unit, so he's gonna stand a good chance at the active roster as a WR.

I'm more of the mind that just making any change because we've got to do something is kinda silly.

If you're gonna make a move, have a good reason to do it. And make sure it's  something that makes sense in the long term, not just the short term.

Basically, think like Gettleman, not like Hurney.

yeah.  I'm not against the team being interested in the right waiver pickup or cheap vet.   But there's not some requirement to flood this team with upgrades that aren't coming.  Norwood not being satisfying enough for the screamers doesn't change a lot.  Three or four receivers will play a meaningful role this season.  If they really feel like one can be better than their 3 or 4, they might make a move.  

And that's a good point about the long term.   This isn't a series of one year deals like last few years' rosters.  There will be guys next year.  There are guys now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

lakefront property in Florida ? Am I missing something? These are found everywhere down here.

If anything is done it will be after week one so a veteran won't count against the salary cap this year.

They still count against the cap. The only advantage to waiting after week 1 to sign a vet is their salary isn't guaranteed. Before week 1, their full year's salary is guaranteed.

  • Pie 1
Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...