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!

     

McCaffrey and Peppers

Shocker

By Shocker,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Steves89 Experienced

Steves89

Posted
Posted

uhh...I don't know that they fill any needs. McCaffrey is not a wide receiver. And he doesn't have the bulk to be a bell cow (or workhorse, or whatever fricking farm animal you want). Peppers can't rush the passer, can't cover, can't play SS. I haven't seen much tape on him, but from what I have seen, I am not impressed. He should have been a RB but he isn't. He's a hyper-athletic player without a position.

As much as I like McCaffrey, these picks fill none of our needs besides returner and good rb depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ace_Aladdin Newbie

Ace_Aladdin

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Steves89 said:

uhh...I don't know that they fill any needs. McCaffrey is not a wide receiver. And he doesn't have the bulk to be a bell cow (or workhorse, or whatever fricking farm animal you want). Peppers can't rush the passer, can't cover, can't play SS. I haven't seen much tape on him, but from what I have seen, I am not impressed. He should have been a RB but he isn't. He's a hyper-athletic player without a position.

As much as I like McCaffrey, these picks fill none of our needs besides returner and good rb depth.

Nope, McCaffrey is a true dual threat his route running ability is better than majority of WR's in this draft.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ivan The Awesome Mentor

Ivan The Awesome

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Steves89 said:

uhh...I don't know that they fill any needs. McCaffrey is not a wide receiver. And he doesn't have the bulk to be a bell cow (or workhorse, or whatever fricking farm animal you want). Peppers can't rush the passer, can't cover, can't play SS. I haven't seen much tape on him, but from what I have seen, I am not impressed. He should have been a RB but he isn't. He's a hyper-athletic player without a position.

As much as I like McCaffrey, these picks fill none of our needs besides returner and good rb depth.

The thing is... He isn't a wide out but he performs as one. He plays the slot and has extensive knowledge of the route tree. He has plenty of experience as a wide out as well he was used as one at Stanford.  

Easily,  he can make this bland offense potent. Dare I say not even Shula can fug this up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Steves89 said:

uhh...I don't know that they fill any needs. McCaffrey is not a wide receiver. And he doesn't have the bulk to be a bell cow (or workhorse, or whatever fricking farm animal you want). Peppers can't rush the passer, can't cover, can't play SS. I haven't seen much tape on him, but from what I have seen, I am not impressed. He should have been a RB but he isn't. He's a hyper-athletic player without a position.

As much as I like McCaffrey, these picks fill none of our needs besides returner and good rb depth.

 

McCaffery very well could get plenty of snaps from the slot. He can be put in the backfield, or in motion. There are a plethora of options to get him the ball in space.

 

We very well could be looking at 1500-2000 all purpose yards here. He has that level of talent. If they want the guy, take him.

 

As for Peppers. The kid is a thumper, and never misses a tackle. He is a football player, with outlandish talent and ability. He is probably the 3rd best S in this class. Do not underestimate this kid.

 

As much as I abhor UofM, I would take Peppers in a heartbeat. Thankfully, or not, we won't get a chance to draft him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

The thing is... He isn't a wide out but he performs as one. He plays the slot and has extensive knowledge of the route tree. He has plenty of experience as a wide out as well he was used as one at Stanford.  

Easily,  he can make this bland offense potent. Dare I say not even Shula can fug this up. 

 

Man, my giddy goes into overdrive thinking about what McCaffery could bring to this Offense.

 

That said. The only player I would take over him would be a Stud DE. There are only 3 of those. So it will be interesting for me as this whole process plays out.

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

    • The Third Reich
      Sorsby and the supplemental draft

      By The Third Reich · Posted

      I read that Pittsburgh is a possibility.  I think of college QB studs who had some form of mental quirk yet tons of talent--but their issue made being a team leader difficult and it led to their demise--going back:  Jamarcus Russell, Art Schlichter, Jeff George, etc. I think people forget that the QB must not only have talent, but they must lead.  
    • The Third Reich
      Sorsby and the supplemental draft

      By The Third Reich · Posted

      I wish I knew more details, but the NIL money to 20-year olds combined with easy access to gambling sites is a side effect that these kids may not have considered.  To your point,A famous 2009 Sports Illustrated article titled “How (and Why) Athletes Go Broke” estimated that 78% of retired NFL players go bankrupt or face significant financial stress within two years of leaving the league.  I am guessing that ego and $$$ and the thrill of competition (most pro athletes love competition because they are the winners) makes it a powerful temptation.  Throw in the ease of gambling on your phone which is always in your hand, and I see your point x 10.
    • The Third Reich
      Ikem

      By The Third Reich · Posted

      Freeling got some reps at RT when they gave Moton a rest day--I sorta hope Freeling gets brought along slowly as you describe.  It would be better for him for reasons you provide.  We have a really good problem. 
×
×
  • Create New...