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!

     

Darnold might be the next one out the door

Matthias

By Matthias,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Fox007 Grand Master

Fox007

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's weird how some posters think it's utterly impossible to do both. We're gonna make a lot of moves this off-season. Moton and Christensen may prove to be the answers at OT. If we're lucky, Brown will prove to be the answer at RG. If everything goes to plan, we could only be needing a LG and. C. It's a lot easier to fill holes on the interior OL than at OT, though I will admit that our free agent choices this off-season leave me pretty concerned about our ability to evaluate FA OL.

Interior OL is easier to find than T's....I mean it's the reason failed T's often move inside. Should be able to get some Gs so long as we actually bring some more in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PootieNunu Grand Master

PootieNunu

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Kev laid it out for us.  Its all right there.  Through free agency and late round picks.  Its brilliant.

 

Meanwhile he cannot point to one top 10 line in the NFL that is built this way

We tried that this offseason and we have the worst interior OL in the league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PootieNunu Grand Master

PootieNunu

Posted
Posted
Just now, Fox007 said:

Interior OL is easier to find than T's....I mean it's the reason failed T's often move inside. Should be able to get some Gs so long as we actually bring some more in.

Thats how we ended up with Elf, Paradis, and Miller in FA and Daley in the draft because interior OL is so easy to find. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Luciu5 Veteran

Luciu5

Posted
Posted

From what we've seen so far, Tepper doesn't interfere in football.  "Tepper wants Watson and will trade away the team for him".  "Tepper wants Justin Fields".  I've seen Tepper wanting and demanding alot of things in but not getting any of them.  I call bs on these articles and I'll believe it when I see it.

Tepper isn't forcing the staff to do anything.  More likely, Rhule or Fitt is fired before he forces a player on them.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Fox007 said:

Interior OL is easier to find than T's....I mean it's the reason failed T's often move inside. Should be able to get some Gs so long as we actually bring some more in.

I was gonna comment on something like that earlier but that was before this thread went way off the rails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iamhubby1 Veteran

iamhubby1

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Kev laid it out for us.  Its all right there.  Through free agency and late round picks.  Its brilliant.

 

Meanwhile he cannot point to one top 10 line in the NFL that is built this way

 

Hey, he's not called @ImaginaryKevfor nothing. If you don't agree with him, you get the full extent of his wraith. lol It's been a long time since someone got so worked up when folks didn't like their plan.

 

If there is a QB out there that can function behind this line. We need to go get him. As long as it is with a draft pick, or via a trade using late round picks. This line is atroscious.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fox007 Grand Master

Fox007

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I was gonna comment on something like that earlier but that was before this thread went way off the rails.

Yea if Christenson can grow and he didn't poo the bed in his first start vs a competent DL he seems like he could work out which would be just fine as we can draft a C with a higher pick and get some FA/lower draft pick G's. I think we could resolve the OL this offseason so long as Christensen can hold up.

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

    • Jay Roosevelt
      fug the HATERS

      By Jay Roosevelt · Posted

      No, you're right. It doesn't mean you can't call out his flaws and poor play. But it also doesn't mean you can't admit when he plays well and shows improvement. Not you personally, just in general I mean.
    • Jay Roosevelt
      fug the HATERS

      By Jay Roosevelt · Posted

      I will say, I do think there's a version of Bryce that could be really successful as a high-volume passer in a spread-based offense built around quick throws and timing-based intermediate throws with deeper throws schemed up around them. I actually think the power run based offense we're running is a poor fit for Bryce as it requires him to play under center far more often. It's a very traditional offensive approach whereas I think a scheme that spreads defenses out and lets Bryce distribute the ball quickly with anticipation and accuracy is the sweet spot for him. The key, of course, is to find a way to run the ball efficiently out of those formations. Our personnel right now (backs and OL) aren't good fits for that style of offense and I'm not sure it's a scheme Dave Canales favors very much either.
    • Martin
      fug the HATERS

      By Martin · Posted

      I root for him, and I hope for the best, as does essentially everyone. But that doesn’t mean you can’t call out flaws and bad plays. And that’s what a lot of people get wrong.  I hope I’m wrong and that he continues to improve a lot, I just doubt it. But I’ve been wrong before 
×
×
  • Create New...