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!

     

Older fans, who ya got? Olsen or Walls?


Cyberjag

Recommended Posts

Most of the posters here are probably too young to remember Wesley Walls and what he meant to the franchise in the 90s, but the guy could block, run, and catch.  He was pretty much our first homegrown star, even if he was drafted by another team.  The guy could do it all, and established records that stood until Olsen came along in a much friendlier passing era.

If you were building a team from scratch and got to choose between all Panthers players to date in their prime, which player would you start at Tight End?  And why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think your memory is that good if you think Walls could block.  Fox let him go because he could not block.  But he probably had the best hands of any player in Panther history.  If you threw it within 5 yards of him he would find a way to catch it.  With that being said I would still rather have Olsen.  He is faster and a better blocker, now.  When Olsen first got here he was on the Walls level of blocking but now he is pretty good at it.  Walls was not the athlete that Olsen is but damn, he could catch everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends of offense and QB

For Steve B, Walls was a great TE, For Cam N and our downfield attack, not many fit better than Olsen.

 

Two different offensive systems, two different QB's and two different TE's.  I think Olsen has been asked to do more, especially with the blocking assignments.  Not that he has mastered it yet, but I think covering more responsibilities than Walls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends of offense and QB

For Steve B, Walls was a great TE, For Cam N and our downfield attack, not many fit better than Olsen.

 

Two different offensive systems, two different QB's and two different TE's.  I think Olsen has been asked to do more, especially with the blocking assignments.  Not that he has mastered it yet, but I think covering more responsibilities than Walls.

Ditto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walls complained about blocking all the time much like Tony G did. He was a heck of a player, but I'd even choose Kris Mangum over him. Mangum may not have the numbers of Walls or Olsen but he did everything. Lunch pail type of team player. But I'd choose Greg Olsen over them all, cerebral type of team player willing to do anything to win.

 

Mangum_jumps_Samuel_091805.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...