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!

     

Sam Darnold Thoughts After Game 1

mav1234

By mav1234,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)

Decent stats - 24/35, 279 yards, 1 TD, 1 rushing TD.  A fumble on a handoff.

Overall, impressed with his play as someone that feared the worst...  No real bone-headed throws.  A couple of misses, but he also had some surprising drops by receivers.  The fumble was bad, and against a better team, maybe catastrophic.  He (Brady?) needs to find ways to get the receivers involved every drive, and whether it was Darnold or Brady, the redzone plays were pretty bad outside the 2nd quarter.

The way he stood tall in the pocket and completed throws with DL about to hit him was impressive. I think this game goes a long way to showing he was not ruined by the Jets.  Elite arm strength on display on a few plays, including that incredible bomb to Robby.

Still too early to say, but we could have something as he grows with the elite skill players around him.  Let's look for a complete game next week!

Edited by mav1234
  • Pie 30
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

I put the fumble on Ricci, honestly.

We'll need to hear the coaches take. It looked like Darnold had the ball extended too much as he passed Ricci, but I didn't see enough replays to be sure.

To be sure, I'd rather a play like that than throwing an INT into double coverage, given what we know about Darnold.  If the fumble was on him, that is easy to correct, and doesn't harken back to his days as a Jet.

1 minute ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

So far he looks very viable, especially if we can get him some better protection.

yeah, the OL is a huge problem.  Can't take advantage of that arm strength often when he has to get the ball out so fast.

  • Pie 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fox007 Grand Master

Fox007

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, PhillyB said:

important thing to me was his poise in the pocket. never panicked, stood through some punishing rushes, came up clutch on several occasions.

and he can gun it deep.

jury's still out but this was a GREAT sign.

 

that was as poised as you can be man IDGAF what one thought about Sam before the game you can't be a legit anything and say otherwise.

Edited by Fox007
  • Pie 7
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...