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!

     

2 Open Roster Spots - where do we need more depth?


KB_fan

Recommended Posts

OK, so in all the kerfuffle about cutting Boykin, it's a bit easy to lose track of the fact that we started rookie mini camp with 85 players.   Signed 6.  Cut 3.  That leaves us with 88 players on the roster.  We've got 2 open spots left...., though of course there will likely be more surprises... some more cuts as we find better players..., injuries, whatever.

I was a bit surprised to see us add ANOTHER tight end.  That now looks to be the most competitive position going into training camp! 

Here's the position breakdown as of the current roster (May 16th) post tryout-signings.   I've also noted the average roster size for each position group last season, and the potential numbers of players who we'll need to cut at each position and the potential cut % for each position. 

May 16th position groups.png

 

So, Huddle: Where do you think we need more depth?

(Obviously the breakdown in # of players per position on the 2016 roster could look different.  Maybe more CBs, fewer RBs...., but I figured seeing the 2015 averages is helpful)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, I'd have to say Safety & Tackle.  

We've got 6 tackles on the roster right now, but I have very little confidence in 3 of them (Hawkins, Foucault, Rigsbee).  I'd really rather see us keep 4 Tackles on the roster this year.  Both Remmers & Oher are in contract years....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jeremy Igo said:

I mean, going from 88 to 90 is pretty irrelevant. Ins't likely to effect final 53.

Sure.  Totally understand & agree.... just a question of where folks are feeling we're thin or they want to see more competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, KB_fan said:

For me, I'd have to say Safety & Tackle.  

We've got 6 tackles on the roster right now, but I have very little confidence in 3 of them (Hawkins, Foucault, Rigsbee).  I'd really rather see us keep 4 Tackles on the roster this year.  Both Remmers & Oher are in contract years....

We did move Travel Dixon from CB to S.

Anyway, another OT is a must. Possibly Wil Beatty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, KB_fan said:

For me, I'd have to say Safety & Tackle.  

We've got 6 tackles on the roster right now, but I have very little confidence in 3 of them (Hawkins, Foucault, Rigsbee).  I'd really rather see us keep 4 Tackles on the roster this year.  Both Remmers & Oher are in contract years....

Agree 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, KB_fan said:

 

I was a bit surprised to see us add ANOTHER tight end.  That now looks to be the most competitive position going into training camp! 

 

It's really two different positions/roles. The receiving TE and the TE/FB hybrid. It's not uncommon for us to keep 4, so 7 in camp isn't too high. Comes down to 5 receivers (1 lock, 4 competing for 2 spots) and two blockers (1 spot). I'd also consider putting Rockhead (who has a background at TE) in the latter category, because a lot of that role is fullback duties.

The fullback designation on this team is always confusing. In recent years, our only FB has been really a big RB who can catch like a TE, while the guy often playing fullback has been listed at TE. So a lot of interchangeable pieces there.

To answer your question, another OT is the top need, preferably a vet to go with our collection of tryout-level players. Second would be DB, not sure which of CB or Safety I'd prefer. Obviously there's a new need at CB, but they may go internal with McClain, Young, or the newly acquired Shaq Richardson.

The only real known quantity we have at Safety is Coleman, though Boston has played well. Switching out Dowling for Dixon does nothing, and I think the Colin Jones experiment may be over. They really like Marlowe and Ball, so hopefully one pans out. Lastly is Trenton Robinson who has starting experience, but wasn't really very good even given the chance. There's probably 4 roster-able players there, but no one really stands out as a second starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Bartin said:

Probably need to sign another QB just to have an extra arm for camp purposes. Possibly a K as well but Swayze can probably pull double duty as a camp leg since he was a kicker in the CFL.

didn't we sign Mr Robato?  Or is he already cut?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PntherPryd said:

didn't we sign Mr Robato?  Or is he already cut?

I think he was just a tryout. Never actually signed him. Igo said the QBs sucked during minicamp so I imagine we would look elsewhere to find one rather than sign Lobato or the Samford QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, jdpanther5 said:

I think the Colin Jones experiment may be over.

I wouldn't bet on this. He's most likely our best ST player (who doesn't kick), and is serviceable (if not very good) at both safety and nickel (who we cut). That being said, that may not be enough to keep him around for 1 more year,  especially if we have to hide developmental players on our roster (Cash and Garrett) like we did Wegher last season. Good players are already getting cut from this team.

To actually answer the question though, we need more tackles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • He’s overthrown WRs numerous times deep,I don’t think his arm strength there is a problem, def seems to be and issue in the 20-30 yard range, I don’t see a lot of outbreaking routes being completed, whether that’s due to his lack of ability to drive the ball to the outside hash or our WRs, especially XL cornering at the top of there routes. regardless of his weaknesses, the question is can a team be built around him to mask them, or can he overcome those weaknesses and adapt. I know it’s beating a dead horse, but something big is missing from Bryce’s qb play that’s leading to so many sub 200 yard passing games, all signs lead to a physical trait that’s the cause of this, wether it’s arm strength or his height  
    • That was fully intentional, because something people who engage in hyperbole can't stand is to be systematically told why and how they don't have a clue. It's the prevalence of this farcical idea that everyone's opinions are valid and the more impassioned they are about them, the more valid they are. And the point of the post wasn't merely to cut the knees of the exaggerators, but to illustrate why it shouldn't seem miraculous that someone like Mayfield and Darnold could come through Charlotte and fail and then suddenly seem much more successful elsewhere, when the reality is that there's far more to being successful at that position than one's own talent. It's also why young quarterbacks like Caleb Williams and Cam Ward deserve much longer leashes to determine their long-term viability and not be written off immediately, because the circumstances surrounding them are hardly conducive to success.
    • I think at some point you top out what God gave you.  He can use leverage via his mechanics to maximize what he has and When he pays attention to it the throws are better.    IMO as a layman a lot of it is what kind of ‘headroom’ you have. The guys who are gifted don’t have to use maximum effort to get good results and stay within themselves but they have it in reserve. They can do an arm throw for substantial distance without max effort.    I think what we may be seeing with these ‘lasers’ is a throw that Bryce puts the max effort into and does his mechanics right and has his base right and it works together.    To get to the payoff here, I think his best velocity throws take dall that whereas  a naturally gifted guy doesn’t need to go full effort to get that same velocity. I have said this three or four times over the years and it never gets picked up on but the accuracy is more consistent with an easier motion and max effort can produce less predictable location. It is a baseball pitcher thing but it applies to throwing a pass too. It isn’t that you can’t make an accurate throw with full effort it is just not as reliably accurate to the same degree. Someone said something about his pro day and that is where I saw it too. He took a little extra step on the deep throws. Some call it a hitch but I don’t see it that way because I don’t see it on shorter throws. He does it trying to get distance. I saw that and just wanted no part of it at 1.1 . That is not tne characteristic of a 1.1 passer.  He should have been at best, late first  I had him second day. Of course I am no one and certainly not a pro evaluator, it is just that he was so easy to suss out. It is kind of in your face obvious.  They must have thought they could fix him. Changing a lifelong throwing motion with the footwork tied into it is not fuging easy. Anyone that had decent success with ‘their’ way and tried to change it to get more, can tell you that.     
×
×
  • Create New...