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!

     

Chris Clark receives $306,000 performance-based bonus

GRWatcher

By GRWatcher,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Camp Fodder said:

He was better than Kalil

No, he wasn't.

Kalil may have been bad but Clark was awful. Had Kalil played, he would have benefited from the same thing Clark did (Newton's quicker release).

 

1 minute ago, My Goodness My Guinness said:

I'd take Clark on the same contract for another year as depth in a heartbeat. 

Can you guarantee Rivera wouldn't start him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t96 Grand Master

t96

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bartin said:

Kind of fits a theory I have and I'm sure I'm not the only one with it. A less talented replacement can come in for a few games and perform really well because there is no tape on him with that team. Then after a few games the tape gets out, weaknesses get identified and they get exposed. Ryan Delaire would have been another example of this. Once everyone realized that literally the only thing he could do was speed rush, he got shut down after a promising first 2-3 games.

Maybe we should just bring in new players at areas of weakness every couple games...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stratopanther Newbie

stratopanther

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Clark's time of "playing well" coincided with Cam Newton's time of being healthy.

I don't think he ever really looked that good. As long as Newton was getting the ball out quickly though, he could serve as a substitute speed bump.

But good grief, his footwork and technique were just horrible.

He looked so bad sometimes but busted his tail to not let his guy get by. I kinda liked him for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Car123 Proficient

Car123

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

No, he wasn't.

Kalil may have been bad but Clark was awful. Had Kalil played, he would have benefited from the same thing Clark did (Newton's quicker release).

 

Can you guarantee Rivera wouldn't start him?

Lol.

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

    • Shotgun
      Clowney released

      By Shotgun · Posted

      Dang, we might not be able to create the same magic from last year!
    • SCO96
      Brooks RB, Placed on PUP, Out for 2025

      By SCO96 · Posted

      If we were a solid winning organization most of us would have no problems with this selection. We would have had a capable starter in place to allow him to be eased into the rotation. If were told prior to the draft that he had been completely cleared health wise, we "probably" wouldn't have a ton of reservations about this selection. If we had picked this young man on Day 3 of the draft most of us would have no problems with this selection because we wouldn't have had to use draft capital to move up and get him. Unfortunately, none of the above were true 1)  We were a terrible team in 2023 and needed an immediate impact player. 2)  He was hurt near the the end of the 2023 NCAA season. We traded up to get him even though we knew he wasn't medically cleared to play in 2024. 3) When training camp started we were hearing stories that the knee wasn't ready. That alone should have raised some red flags. I personally would have red-shirted him in 2024 in order to have him ready for 2025. We had Chubba as our lead back and other guys to fill the #2 and #3 spots on the depth chart. There was no need to rush Brooks unto the field in 2024. Here's our draft history in the 2nd round between 2021 and 2024 2021 TMJ 2022 No draft choice. We picked Matt Corall in round 3 (#94) as our only Day 2 pick. 2023 Jonathan Mingo 2024 Jonathon Brooks. We have taken 4 skill players on Day 2 of the draft for the past 4 years who have contributed absolutely nothing to the offensive side of the football. 3 are no longer on the team. Two of them are no longer in the NFL. One  could possibly never start a game due to a knee injury. This type of poor drafting is why this team has been so bad for the entire decade. 
    • Waldo
      Clowney released

      By Waldo · Posted

      Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
×
×
  • Create New...