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!

     

Thursday Panthers Camp Updates


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Splitting 1st team reps should be a little more balanced. Every other day has too many variables with weather and fatigue. Don't see how they can keep it 50/50 too much longer though

 

I know rhule hate is pretty common now but how has there been no evaluations yet? He’s basically saying they’ve wasted two days. Laziest Coach I’ve ever seen 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Sounds like Darnold is trying to win the job by not fuging up/checking almost everything down, and Baker is going all out no fear style. 

 

That’s been Sam’s M.O. his whole career. It’s Clausenesque the way he dinks and dunks the ball around. It’s what also could end CMC for good.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dxpanther said:

that's because we're talking about the post of being early! wtf.

 

it's nonsense and shouldn't even be a factor. it's literally just a wankfest fans to see who has the lunchiest lunch pail, bluest blue collar, suckiest suck-up mentality. it doesnt matter when discussing who's first on field by a matter of minutes. that's it. nothing to go off of.

if one of my reports shows up to an office meeting 15min early, im telling their ass to get back to their desk and answer some emails. no one is impressed by your gimmicks of wannabe leadership.

You're probably the guy.that shows up at 0759 for a 0800 work shift

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dxpanther said:

in the unlikely case you can't decide between two players, i'd really hope they would just have it decided by a foot race or three cone. giving it to the guy that puts his pads on and his shoes faster is just asinine to me.

We have limited access to the players' development.  Being first on the field is a symptom of an eager, competitive person who is ready to go.  For example, sitting on the front row in school does not mean you are getting an A, but more kids from the front row make As compared to those who sit in the back.  You do not give As to the kids based on where they sit, but it is a fair indicator of their work ethic.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

You're probably the guy.that shows up at 0759 for a 0800 work shift

im they guy the cares more about people's work and production and where they finish, than who's standing around on the field and stretching a whole 5 minutes before everyone else. 

it's pointless and useless information. like that idiot kid who was sleeping in his car in front of the stadium trying to prove how bad he wanted it. coaches and players dont care. it's just feel good bs for the fans and reporters.

 

i could do this all day haha.

  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jackie Lee said:

 

People keep bringing up how Baker didn't perform with so many weapons in Cleveland, but honestly 1) he did when healthy, as his 2020 season is severely overlooked by most, and 2) he did NOT have a weapon like DJ, ever.  Landry is a great route runner but most people on this board walk faster than he runs and OBJ has been living off of his rep from his first three seasons with Giants ever since...  he never had a WR the caliber of DJ.  And to be honest, when Robbie is ON, he is far better than Landry as well.  Baker is going to look better and better the more reps he gets and the more comfortable he gets with the playbook.  

Love the early results!

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Sounds like Darnold is trying to win the job by not fuging up/checking almost everything down, and Baker is going all out no fear style. 

 

It's the same garbage he did last year.  Smh...  I really wish they would quit wasting reps on him.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, trueblade said:

 

Not understanding this charade at all.  Yall had all last season to try BC at LT and you didn't want to.  But now, with a widely-regarded franchise LT on the roster, let's pretend we're gonna a play BC over him!

Only grace I'll give the staff is Campen wasn't here last year, so he may want a look at everybody, but other than that, fug all that.

  • Pie 2
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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...