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!

     

Poll: Sit them? or give them reps on Thursday?

KB_fan

By KB_fan,
in Carolina Panthers

Do you play Clausell on Thursday night?  

71 members have voted

  1. 1. Play Clausell on Thursday?

    • Yes, he needs reps!
      52
    • No, keep him in bubble wrap!
      19

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 08/29/2018 at 12:00 PM

Recommended Posts

KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
Posted

So it suddenly dawned on me that there's a game on Thursday night in which we need a healthy Offensive Line to play.  Given we're out 4 starters / key depth guys, I started to wonder  do we even have enough healthy guys to spare?  The answer is yes, just barely.

Here are the healthy guys on our line right now.  (Excludes: Williams, Matt Kalil, Amini, Sirles)

Group 1: (Starters)  R Kalil, Turner, Moton, Van Roten

Group 2:  (Key backups)  Larsen, Clausell

Group 3:  Mahon, Friend, Hearn, Bisnowaty, Eaton, Price, and Dorian Johnson

 

Presumably group 1 is in Bubble Wrap until week 1 vs Dallas. Group 3 will get the bulk of playing time Thursday Night.  Do you play Larsen or Clausell at all on Thursday?  Clausell at the moment COULD be our starting RT vs Dallas.  In any case he is pretty important depth at a position where we have virtually no proven (healthy) depth at the moment.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

On the subject of Oline, two other quick comments.

1) Thank goodness the NFL did away with the intermediate roster cuts down to 75 players.  We would have had to make drastic cuts at other positions just to field a healthy O line, or risk playing some of our 1st string.  Right now we need all 7 of the OL "camp bodies".   Our situation at OL makes roster cuts difficult, but the roster situation could have been much worse had we been forced to make cuts this week!

 

2) I think it was on Panther Talk last night that I heard a reporter (Mick?  Eugene?) mention that Trai took some snaps at RT in practice yesterday.

If none of the 4 injured guys are back for week 1 vs. Dallas, here are our options at RT:

1) Clausell

2) Some guy we pick up from another team

3) Move Trai over to RT and play Larsen or someone else at RG.

 

What's your poison?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pup McBarky Proficient

Pup McBarky

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, KB_fan said:

If none of the 4 injured guys are back for week 1 vs. Dallas, here are our options at RT:

1) Clausell

 2) Some guy we pick up from another team

3) Move Trai over to RT and play Larsen or someone else at RG.

 

What's your poison?

1, 2, 3 in that order. 3 should be emergency only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shaqattaq Grand Master

shaqattaq

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:

Play Clausell  for 10 snaps. But, my vote is a very soft yes. Not surprised nor disappointed if they sit him. We also need more film on those other guys, especially given we'll need one or two of them to backup our tackles.

I think the same. I was actually a bit surprised when they moved him to LT last week, unless they know something about Sirles' injury that they're keeping quiet. I actually feel the same about letting Van Rotten and Moton play a series on the left. they need snaps together, and I would love some RB's not named CMC get a few chances behind actual blockers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shaqattaq Grand Master

shaqattaq

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:
32 minutes ago, KB_fan said:

If none of the 4 injured guys are back for week 1 vs. Dallas, here are our options at RT:

1) Clausell

 2) Some guy we pick up from another team

3) Move Trai over to RT and play Larsen or someone else at RG.

 

What's your poison?

1, 2, 3 in that order. 3 should be emergency only.

I agree with Pup's ordering, but isn't Bisniwaty a 4th option. I admit that I know nothing at all about him, but he's one of the guys I'll be watching against Pitt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Personally, I voted for sitting Clausell.  

He got something like 25 reps at RT with our current starting OL combo of Moton, GVR, Ryan and Trai vs the Patriots 1st team.

I think that for the sake of continuity, we should assume he's our week 1 starter at RT and sit him. More important to see the other tackles play since right now we have no obvious answer to who would be next man up behind Moton and Clausell.

Hopefully that is a totally moot point / hypothetical question we never have to answer, if we can get Sirles and Amini back quickly. (No, Amini is not a good option, but perhaps better than guys like Bisnowaty or Johnson!)*

*This is not to say Bisnowaty or Johnson or others are bad. Just they're REALLY raw / unproven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
11 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Williams was hurt in practice. Where Sirles was hurt wasn’t game related that could have been a practice rep as well. I think Sirles was hurt because he hadn’t been in training camp as much as everyone else. That was his first game action IIRC. And well Kalil, who cares. 

Just checked. Sirles didn't play week 1. Played 16 snaps week 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted

My opinion is we have too many pre-season games anyway.  How many do they get in college? 

The fourth pre-season game should be to allow for those at the bottom of the roster to show what they can do.  We have a lot of key battles going on, and frankly, I am interested in seeing how these bubble boys play.

#3 RB: Hood vs. CAP vs. Barner  (CMC and Anderson locks-I think this boils down to what kind of back we need, which makes Barner appear to be the front runner)

#5 CB: Seymour vs. Gunter, vs. Doss vs. A. Carter  vs. Cole (Bradberry, Jackson, Munnerlyn, Elder locks- who knows?  We are in trouble if any have to play)

#5 DE: Hall vs. Cox Jr,  (Peppers, Addison, Horton, Haynes locks= no chance we keep 6; Hall to PS?)

#6 LB: Norris vs. Smith vs. Jacobs (Luke, TD, Shaq, Mayo, Carter locks--Norris has played well, but they might be high on Smith--Jacobs is 30 and may be done here.  It is possible we keep 7 lbs.)

#2 QB Heinicke vs. Gilbert (Cam lock-does it make sense to keep 3?  I think we keep 2 and sign a QB to the PS)

#3 TE Vander Laan vs. Baylis (Olsen, Thomas locks-not sure about Manhertz' s status or if it matters)

#6 WR Byrd (Funchess, Moore, Wright, Smith?, Samuel locks--will we keep 6? I get the feeling that they are looking for a player they expect to make the active roster to return punts, so unless Byrd is in the top 4, he could be cut, despite a nice return vs. New England.)

#10 OL Mahon vs. Hearn vs. Bosh vs. Silatolu (Kalil, Kalil, Moton, Turner, Van Roton, Williams, Larsen, Sirles, Clausell locks--one spot remaining IF we keep 10.  Amini probably gets the not unless he goes to IR--Mahon is next up)

NOTE:  Could Bug Howard be sent to PS to convert to a TE?  If he added 20 lbs of muscle, he might have a better chance of playing on Sundays....Alex Carter could be a sleeper at S or CB....What to do with D. Hall?  Another year on IR?...Would we keep Byrd and cut T. Smith?  That would be interesting.  Would we have a legit deep threat?  I think Samuel, Byrd, and/or Moore could be.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
17 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Alex Carter could be a sleeper at S or CB....

Very interesting point. Was listening to too much Panthers radio talk yesterday and at least 1 commentator/ former player was really impressed with Carter.

I think it was either Eugene or Rucker. But one of them definitely mentioned Carter as a sleeper for the PS if not the 53 due to space issues.

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

    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Yep, like I said, I don't mind guaranteeing them money, but make the contracts smaller amounts in order to minimize cap implications. I don't know about "half," the actual amounts, whether more or less than half, would have to be determined by the NFL and NFLPA (which will probably be highly contentious, if not "impossible").  I'm just for whatever leads to the best product on the field while also unaffecting my wallet. As an aside, the NFL owners are greedy bastards in my estimation. They're trying to keep a larger portion of the pie, but players' agents are greedy as well, and they've sewn seeds of greed among the players. It's not all their fault; we all know what our society has evolved into, but the NFL wants a bigger piece of our smaller pocketbooks and refuses to "negotiate" with us (that's why we don't have cheaper and more reasonable à la carte options to view games that they're gradually trying to migrate to paid TV), so fu<k 'em. And then on top of that we have guys trying to water down the product even more by feeding greed. Change the way things are done so that we can at least see players prove themselves on the field without throwing wrenches into the engine that pays guys that have proven they can play on a pro level.
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Teddy Checkdown in trouble

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      So if one of the parents wants to buy the theatre group or the band lunch they should get banned?
    • TD alt
      Teddy Checkdown in trouble

      By TD alt · Posted

      OK, I didn't realize this was about high school, but...if I'm spending my personal money trying to help some kids out, then no one is going to tell me how to spend my money. I get enough of the government spending my money--allocating my tax dollars--to children who don't really need anything, and now they're trying to tell me how to spend my personal money? Sure, there are many other issues to consider and rabbit holes that we could go down due to ethical concerns because it concerns kids, and the need for transparency is extremely important, but maybe as opposed to trying to stop kids from benefitting in darkness, we need to open up the blinds (and blinders) a little bit so that they can benefit in the light. I get where you're coming from, but this is a loaded and layered issue, and I'm just trying to give you some food for thought. 
×
×
  • Create New...