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!

     

John Clayton

doghead28

By doghead28,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

doghead28 Newbie

doghead28

Posted
Posted

This guy is a moron. He said if we don't win Sunday then there is no way we could beat the Giants in the playoffs on the road. He proceeded to say without winning this game we cannot make it to the Super Bowl. Yes I want homefield. I want the Panthers to win but if we don't I don't think the season is lost by any means. This guy is paid as a football expert. How can you make uneducated comments such as this like they are facts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Plewis Newbie

Plewis

Posted
Posted

he's got a point... with the injuries the Giants have right now and how they're playing on their heels and we're steamrolling. If we don't win, it'll be hard to concieve us beating them in Jan. Not that it couldn't happen. But I don't take that as a huge insult. I think the Grim Reaper actually knows his poo for the most part.... him and Jaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BIGH2001 Grand Master

BIGH2001

Posted
Posted

he's got a point... with the injuries the Giants have right now and how they're playing on their heels and we're steamrolling. If we don't win, it'll be hard to concieve us beating them in Jan. Not that it couldn't happen. But I don't take that as a huge insult. I think the Grim Reaper actually knows his sh*t for the most part.... him and Jaws.

The next time Clayton catches a football will be the first. He knows nothing about the game itself and should probably be relegated to the role of team correspondent where he can follow the players around all week and get interesting soundbites to share with the sportscenter anchors. The problem is that he's not a hot woman, so he can't fill that spot. In fact, I'm not really sure why he's on ESPN.

Remember, we lost at Chicago, at Dallas and at home to Philly and then went on to beat all three of those teams during our past playoff runs. What happens Sunday is important, but if we lose it doesn't mean that chances for a title are gone.

I guess that these analysts make a living by hyping up every week of the NFL season like it's the last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CharlotteBeer.com Newbie

CharlotteBeer.com

Posted
Posted

Yeah, we've never beaten a team in the playoffs after losing to them in the regular season.... except for Dallas in 03, Philly in 03, and Chicago in 05.

Owned.

I wonder if Clayton thinks the same is true: that if we were to beat New York, there would be no chance they could beat us at home in the playoffs and advance to the Super Bowl.

After all, they are the ones on a two-game losing skid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xPUREBYBLOODx Newbie

xPUREBYBLOODx

Posted
Posted

This guy is a moron. He said if we don't win Sunday then there is no way we could beat the Giants in the playoffs on the road. He proceeded to say without winning this game we cannot make it to the Super Bowl. Yes I want homefield. I want the Panthers to win but if we don't I don't think the season is lost by any means. This guy is paid as a football expert. How can you make uneducated comments such as this like they are facts?

Yeah I was totally yealling at the TV when I was watching that. ESPN reporters are such MASSIVE tools. Half of them probably don't even believe the crap they report. Just do it for THE MAN. So friggin retarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShutDwn Newbie

ShutDwn

Posted
Posted

Can we just make a thread of "he said she said" posts? They are coming up every day, Jim Rome said this, John Clayton said this, Steve young said that.

WHO CARES?!

They don't have any say on what happens on the field, stop freaking out and taking these so personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...