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!

     

Jared Cook

AndrewLaskoski

By AndrewLaskoski,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

hepcat Grand Master

hepcat

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, AndrewLaskoski said:

Maybe Ed Dickson isn't as safe as some would imagine. Or maybe this backs up the idea that the Panthers go after a TE in the draft. We know that it won't be Cook as he just signed with the Packers, but interesting to see where Gettlemen's head is at. 

What say you?

It means Gettleman is always looking to improve the roster at all positions. He is a badass GM that took the Panthers to the Superbowl in three seasons on the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
top dawg Grand Master

top dawg

Posted
Posted

I don't think most people thought that Dickson  was safe in the first place. His stark lack of productuin has been discussed earlier this offseason. 

I am more miffed about why it seems like we always show interest in guys with mitts for hands,  including Cook and Dickson. 

If we can draft a good TE, great! I wouldn't mind Scott Chandler or Owen Daniels in the meantime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The_Rainmaker Newbie

The_Rainmaker

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, AndrewLaskoski said:

Maybe Ed Dickson isn't as safe as some would imagine. Or maybe this backs up the idea that the Panthers go after a TE in the draft. We know that it won't be Cook as he just signed with the Packers, but interesting to see where Gettlemen's head is at. 

What say you?

Yes, come on down Hunter Henry!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JakeH Newbie

JakeH

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, JakeH said:

Cook is a potential dynamic receiver and a matchup nightmare for opposing defenses. It shouldn't surprise anyone that we were looking to go from PFF's worst-ranked TE to that opposite Olsen. 

And to expand on this, our interest in Cook should make it abundantly clear that we're interested in adding to our offensive threats. A #2 TE makes the most sense, since that spot has been a black hole since Shockey left, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Gettleman target a receiver at this point either. After all, Cook is essentially a large WR. His lack of blocking ability keeps him from effectively being an in-line TE or H-back, and he was in the slot enough in Tennessee to request WR money when he was franchised. 

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...