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

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

13 minutes ago, KB_fan said:

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.

I think Cox is the fifth S and there is a logjam for the fifth CB spot, but he has done fairly well when I watched him--considering what I know about his responsibilities.  PS might be the spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I’m giving every starter but Cam a series or two this Thursday. I exclude Cam because of the shiner he got last game, and 2.) generally he practices throughout the entire offseason/preseason without a vet day, while everyone else gets one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

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.

 

 

I think we are rollong with 6wrs. We are not cutting T smith bc of riveras lovefor veteran leadship and we are keeping Byrd for SP bc Rivera stated byrd always makes plays. He has worked hard to get better he will stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point if we're looking at a Week 1 OL Group of:

Moton / Van Roten / Kalil / Turner / Clausewell -- Larsen

We have to sit all of the above, they can get their reps in practice the next two weeks to be ready Week 1. 

Play the depth, and see what any of them have to offer moving forward as they look to discern who the back ups will be. I'm not of the mindset that we need a 4th game to see what we have. If the coaches don't know by now 10 snaps won't make a difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ace_Aladdin said:

This is a false assessment, CAP is actually competing for #2 RB spot.

 

They believed so much in him they went out and got CJ Anderson just to compete with him. Who would've imagined that CJ is better at running the ball, has better vision, better balance, is a better blocker, and much better receiver?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.  He plays against a couple of the best DL in the league on a daily basis in practice.  There is nothing that playing against the Steelers 2nd, 3rd, or 4th string defense is going to do to improve his game.  Only bad things can happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, looks like the majority should get their wish.

Ron said today that even Moton would play a little bit. So I assume that means guys like Larsen and Clausell will probably play some too.

Dang. I wanted the bubble wrap for the 5 week 1 presumed starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, KB_fan said:

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?

Rivera: Players have to handle the pressure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...