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!

     

Panthers cut down day thread.

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Basbear Grand Master

Basbear

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

This just in:  We don't have an NFL-caliber backup QB.

Denver, Philly(lots of doubt form me), colts(without Wertz), Wash, and someteam Ive over looked(Pitt?).....Panthers look like they have the least talented or bottom 3 for sure until Darnold shows something. 

OL, QB, and LB need to be ALL the picks next year. ALL OF THEM.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Varking Grand Master

Varking

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Tinamedina said:

Gotta disagree, the ball goes downfield practically by force, his passes sometimes dont have enough touches. As far as the lions? A win is a win. This defense is elite, with PJ walker playing it's an easy 9 wins or ten. What's wrong with a defense carrying the QB? Worked for other qbs.

How can you say, today, that this defense is elite? And no, if PJ Walker is our starter we are not an "easy 9 wins or ten". If he starts 17 games we are picking in the top 5. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky Davis Veteran

Rocky Davis

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Varking said:

How can you say, today, that this defense is elite? And no, if PJ Walker is our starter we are not an "easy 9 wins or ten". If he starts 17 games we are picking in the top 5. 

I said this and immediately they responded our defense would carry us to 9-10 wins.

I chuckled.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayflip Proficient

jayflip

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

People get mad at me for making Temple jokes but they should really get mad because they’re true. 

No one’s mad at you. We’re just annoyed with your played out schtick and your attempts to derail every thread. Like LG’s million posts about Darnold, your posts are all the same and all tired AF. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...