In affirmation of our new CBs, you can read between the lines regarding Boykin

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

The reason we released Brandon Boykin is simple. He would take reps away from or 3 rookie CB. We want Boykin's reps to go to our rookies.

On its face, I really don't believe it was that simple. You don't have to release a guy to get other guys reps. It's not like Boykin is a league legend that demands playing time. We would have appeared well within our intellectual and ethical rights to play him behind one or more of these guys (with the 2s and 3s). At worst he would have provided valuable veteran depth---which has been his story as a pro so far---and that's not something you just drop because some largely  unproven vet's toes are stepped on.

[MadHatter]

7 hours ago, X-Clown on 1 said:

An experienced vet is going to be better than a rookie, 90% of the time.  Saying adios to Boykin, before even seeing what he can do, and handing the reigns over to 3 rookies is why most people are raising an eyebrow.  I understand the argument about coaching players for other teams, or taking playing/learning time away from the rookies that are your future.  But, you need guys with experience on the field that can play at a higher level while the rookies over come the learning curve.  But, on to training camp.   What's done is done. 

4th team in 2 years......enough said.

[KillaCamNewton]

i really dont understand the Shaq Richardson pickup. He was terrible at Arizona while I was a student there and honestly the only reason he even got drafted was because he ran a really good 40 time at the Pro Day i went to

[tiger7_88]

2 hours ago, top dawg said:

On its face, I really don't believe it was that simple. You don't have to release a guy to get other guys reps. It's not like Boykin is a league legend that demands playing time. We would have appeared well within our intellectual and ethical rights to play him behind one or more of these guys (with the 2s and 3s). At worst he would have provided valuable veteran depth---which has been his story as a pro so far---and that's not something you just drop because some largely  unproven vet's toes are stepped on.

Again, I reference you to the statement that Gettleman made in his post-draft press conference about veteran free agents that end up being unhappy with their role.

And, as a follow up, I ask you this:  do you think Boykin would have been happy as merely "veteran depth"?  If the answer to that question in your mind is "no", then I re-reference you back to the statement that Gettleman made in his post-draft press conference about veteran free agents that end up being unhappy with their role.

[top dawg]

32 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

Again, I reference you to the statement that Gettleman made in his post-draft press conference about veteran free agents that end up being unhappy with their role.

And, as a follow up, I ask you this:  do you think Boykin would have been happy as merely "veteran depth"?  If the answer to that question in your mind is "no", then I re-reference you back to the statement that Gettleman made in his post-draft press conference about veteran free agents that end up being unhappy with their role.

Believe it or not, l thought about before writing the OP, and then again when responding to the post. Sure, I believe that Gettleman could have been heading things off at the pass, but I also believe that Boykin was hit out of left field, and would have appreciated and at least had the opportunity to address that and any other related before being cut. 

I truly believe that he just didn't fit the physical profile---literally and style wise---that we were looking for, and that's the "simple" reason why he was let go.

[Woodie]

1 hour ago, tiger7_88 said:

Again, I reference you to the statement that Gettleman made in his post-draft press conference about veteran free agents that end up being unhappy with their role.

And, as a follow up, I ask you this:  do you think Boykin would have been happy as merely "veteran depth"?  If the answer to that question in your mind is "no", then I re-reference you back to the statement that Gettleman made in his post-draft press conference about veteran free agents that end up being unhappy with their role.

Yep, and he signed here on a prove-it deal hoping to earn a big check next FA period.  How would he have felt and reacted if he wasn't given a chance to prove anything because we wanted to develop our rookies?  Probably not very well.

My guess is that the part of the reason Boykin was released that Gettleman won't and can't say is that they wanted to prevent a potential locker room distraction.   

[CPantherKing]

Outside of the 1st round there have only been 2 notable CBs over the past 10 seasons in their rookie season. Both performed on pass defenses that finished on losing teams among the bottom half of pass defenses in the NFL.

Janoris Jenkins

E.J. Gaines

Even if you believe all the rookie CBs are going to be great/good, you still must realize they are rookies playing the most difficult position to transition to in the NFL (excluding QB). Bene Benwikere is coming into his 3rd season, and he is still developing. Rivera had trouble trusting Bene and Norman to be disciplined and carry out their responsibility in their first couple seasons in his defense.

The odds are not in favor of the rookie CBs being world beaters. Odds actually favor 1 or 2 of the CBs drafted to bust before their 3rd season. Then there is the rookie wall to consider. Even if they do manage to overcome all the hurdles, they will become reliable in 3 seasons at the earliest as a great majority of the valuable CBs have done in their development process.

The Panthers defense is much more vulnerable now than many fans would like to believe. The lack of veteran leadership in the secondary will hinder the Panthers defense - especially late in the season.

[CPantherKing]

2 hours ago, Woodie said:

Yep, and he signed here on a prove-it deal hoping to earn a big check next FA period.  How would he have felt and reacted if he wasn't given a chance to prove anything because we wanted to develop our rookies?  Probably not very well.

My guess is that the part of the reason Boykin was released that Gettleman won't and can't say is that they wanted to prevent a potential locker room distraction.   

Boykin was brought here to be the nickel in a strong front 7 to complete the secondary between one of the best CBs in the NFL and a promising up and coming CB.

Imagine how he felt when the plan he was pitched completely crumbled and turned into a total rebuild of youth/inexperience?

Do you think he ever wanted to be an outside CB? No. He takes pride in covering the slot and making a living out of it in the NFL. He has several other teams who want him to fill that exact role. Now, do you think he wants to be trusting his career to the calls/communication of 3 rookie CBs? Absolutely not. Having to work with 1 rookie CB for a majority of a game is bad enough with all the communication breakdowns that will occur.

[TheNewStandard]

15 hours ago, shaqattaq said:

I'm not sure that it's 100% accurate to say that Bene is better on the outside. If Worley, Bradberry or Young work out, I could see him playing more in the slot than outside.  I'm not saying it will happen, just that it could happen. He has excelled in that role for us. Otherwise, we're just assuming that Sanchez is our nickel.

I'm not convinced that Bene' will be moved to the outside at this point. 

I just don't see using him in a role where he is unproven in lieu of some rookie CBs coming out of the draft. 

We'll just have to see what's what in training camp.

[MountainHeel66]

2 hours ago, TheNewStandard said:

I'm not convinced that Bene' will be moved to the outside at this point. 

I just don't see using him in a role where he is unproven in lieu of some rookie CBs coming out of the draft. 

We'll just have to see what's what in training camp.

Bene HAS played on the outside for us and, imo, was much better there than he was in the slot for us last season. I didn't think the slot worked out all that well for him at all compared to his previous performances outside. But maybe I'm the crazy one here.

[PoundCat]

I think Boykin was just an insurance policy in case the draft went horribly wrong and we weren't able to draft serviceable CBs. We got 3 that DG and the staff are happy with, so Boykin became expendable.

Let's also keep in mind that we do have a recent history of starting rookies in various positions if RR feels they are ready. I gotta trust the staff on this one.

[mashburnfalcon]

Am I hearing this right? You rather the falcons have a proven NFL player boykin instead of one of these rookies (like bene)???? And you would be more upset? 

 

Yeah I'm not buying it. I rather give you any dt we drafted instead of giving y'all soliai. (And that's even with soliai being limited in Quinns scheme)

[PoundCat]

7 minutes ago, mashburnfalcon said:

Am I hearing this right? You rather the falcons have a proven NFL player boykin instead of one of these rookies (like bene)???? And you would be more upset? 

 

Yeah I'm not buying it. I rather give you any dt we drafted instead of giving y'all soliai. (And that's even with soliai being limited in Quinns scheme)

I'm not sure if people here are really thinking about the Falcons when discussing the Panthers roster. I know I'm not. They can sign all our castoffs if they want.

[teeray]

I've been spending too much in the Tinderbox.  Was there really people upset we cut Boykin??