Panthers met with at least four receivers

[Shocker]

Just now, countryboi said:

from what I have seen he is super quick and explosive but didnt run the best routes. Maybe thats his separation issue because he has the ability.

 

Gotta remember the Maryland QB situation was laughable.  I think they went to the 4th stringer which is really tough.

[TheSpecialJuan]

yay

[ecu88]

Moore > Washington > Brown/Sutton

I can see an offensive type draft:

1  Dallas TE

2  DJ Moore WR

3  Nick Chubb RB

3  Jessie Bates III, S

5  Colby Gossett, G

6  Eddy Pineiro, K

7 Wyatt Teller, OL

7 Sam Jones, OL

 

* Edit

Sign Eric Reid S

Sign Kyle Williams DT

Resign Byrd, Peppers, Larsen

 

[AU-panther]

1 hour ago, top dawg said:

At least it puts away the crazy notion that we are only interested in free agent receivers. 

Unfortunately it might mean we are just going to sign a cheap "vet" and then add a 1st or 2nd round WR.

[Reebis21]

1 hour ago, top dawg said:

Might as well add this from Walter Football,  so that we can get a more complete picture. 

• Mike Gesicki, TE, Penn State (SR%)
• DaeSean Hamilton, WR, Penn State (EW)
• Micah Kiser, ILB, Virginia (SR)
• Sony Michel, RB, Georgia (COM)
• Deadrin Senat, DT/NT, South Florida (EW)
• David Wells, TE, San Diego State (EW)
  
  
   
• Read more: http://walterfootball.com/prospectMeetings/byteam#ixzz58kFiXD8W
  
  Read more at http://walterfootball.com/prospectMeetings/byteam#OWkAcf47CuQTaTlS.99

Met multiple times with Gesicki at the Senior Bowl? That’s what I’m talkin bout! Him and Greg in a 2 TE set would be lethal...now watch the Saints draft him

 

[top dawg]

44 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Unfortunately it might mean we are just going to sign a cheap "vet" and then add a 1st or 2nd round WR.

Why is that unfortunate?  An inexpensive vet doesn't necessarily mean a bad one,  and a first or second rounder receiver will be better than nothing.  That would mean we would have at least three second round receivers at worst.  If we go out and get Moncrief for example,  that would be plenty of talent. 

[ecu88]

Just now, top dawg said:

Why is that unfortunate?  An inexpensive vet doesn't necessarily mean a bad one,  and a first or second rounder receiver will be better than nothing.  That would mean we would have at least three second round receivers at worst.  If we go out and get Moncrief for example,  that would be plenty of talent. 

Moncrief or Janis would be good

[ecu88]

58 minutes ago, Uncfan said:

We don't need a dang wr dumb people . We need pass rushers!

 

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, Uncfan said:

We don't need a dang wr dumb people . We need pass rushers!

We need the BPA in fitting with all our needs.  If that's WR,  so be it. 

Perhaps you want to tell us dummies  how in the world Chubb or Davenport is going to fall to us because Hubbard may or may not be worth our pick, and that's if he's even on the board. Or, maybe you think that we should draft an inferior edge rusher over a superior wide receiver (running back or safety).  

We're listening.

[LinvilleGorge]

6 minutes ago, top dawg said:

We need the BPA in fitting with all our needs.  If that's WR,  so be it. 

Perhaps you want to tell us dummies  how in the world Chubb or Davenport is going to fall to us because Hubbard may or may not be worth our pick, and that's if he's even on the board. Or, maybe you think that we should draft an inferior edge rusher over a superior wide receiver (running back or safety).  

We're listening.

Uncfan is to DE as sanjay is to TE

[Camp Fodder]

I just don’t think drafting a WR high to go along with our already young WRs is a good idea. We need a vet FA pickup

[Palmetto]

1 minute ago, Camp Fodder said:

I just don’t think drafting a WR high to go along with our already young WRs is a good idea. We need a vet FA pickup

If they believe that a rookie would be a extremely better Wr over the young ones we have then yea take him

[LinvilleGorge]

8 minutes ago, Camp Fodder said:

I just don’t think drafting a WR high to go along with our already young WRs is a good idea. We need a vet FA pickup

Why not both? Why does it have to be either/or? Right now, we only have two WRs on our roster who were actually drafted. Shepard, Byrd, Clay, and Bersin were all UDFAs. Samuel was very raw as a WR coming out and then missed a ton of offseason time last year. He's probably gonna need to be treated as a rookie again himself next year. 

I'm absolutely on board with signing a decent veteran free agent AND taking a WR in the first three rounds of the draft next month. Our WR corps is pretty much trash.

[Captain Morgan]

I was cool with taking a WR in the 5th, but after hearing about Samuels' injury, I've got the panics.  Now I'm cool with using one of our first 4 picks on a receiver.  And signing a vet.  And drafting one of the TEs.

Really, really wish we had our 4th this year.  Taking a WR and/or TE in the first 3 picks means we're not gonna get one of other needs till the 5th.  I really want one of the centers, of course we need safety and DE, and we also need a linebacker and a DT.

I'd really like Hurney to get the ball moving on some free agents.