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!

     

Go ahead, admit it. Huddle confessionals.

Ivan The Awesome

By Ivan The Awesome,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

higgs Newbie

higgs

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, BlitzMonster said:

I thought Sam Darold would be a good QB.

I assumed his play in NY was mostly a function of the horrible Jets organization - which has been a disaster for at least the last 20 years (and maybe since Joe Namath).  A guy like Darnold with his size, talent & experience would surely thrive in a new environment at Carolina with its good coaching (!!) and surrounded by playmakers (which lasted all of 3 games).  

I was sadly proven very wrong.  I don't even view Darnold as a capable backup QB right now.  He's that awful. 

This is me 100%, no need to write it again.

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

Waldo

Posted
Posted

I never believed in this year or the moves we made this offseason. The Darnold trade set the pace and I fugging melted down then. I'm glad I got it out of the way.

I was wrong about last year, I said we had a staff that could coach up players. That was pure fantasy. This staff is terrible outside of our D. 

 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AU-panther Mentor

AU-panther

Posted
Posted

I didn't think our O-line would be good, but I didn't' expect this bad.  A lot of our line are the same guys as last year, short Okung who didn't play much, and we added two draft picks.

Last years O-line was a middle 1/3 unit, I was expecting the same, possible lower middle 1/3.  Between CMC being back and our quick passing style I didn't' expect us to be this bad.  

I tend to not think in rankings in terms of 1-32, impossible to really separate teams that closely.  Whether you are the 22 or 25 worst o-line you are bad.

I think more of top 1/3 (think top 10), bottom 1/3 (think bottom 10), middle 1/3 (everyone else).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Holiday Grand Master

Doc Holiday

Posted
Posted

I was right on a lot, so I honestly don’t know where I was majorly wrong on anything, maybe thinking we needed to draft Parsons, but I said that if we had drafted anyone on defense it should have been Parsons so that’s not wrong either…

still think Parsons would have been better than Horn overall.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Adb6368 Proficient

Adb6368

Posted
Posted
On 9/21/2021 at 10:19 PM, Ocpanthertew714 said:

Will all of Justin's little Fielders please stand up.

Ok.. I admit, I thought it was a terrible idea not to draft a QB.

hockey camera GIF

You think you were wrong aboht this? Fields is still a question but you’d honestly prefer what we have now over mac Jones?

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...