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!

     

Who are your top 5 Panthers players of all time based on talent?


CamWhoaaCam
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I have him 3rd on my list bro...

 

 

Confused GIFs | Tenor

 

Apologies my friend, my dyslexic ass read it fast and thought it said Luke was not a freak athlete. 

I'd also probably have Stewart somewhere on the list too because he literally checked every criteria or size, speed, skill and production when on the field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, panther252 said:

Apologies my friend, my dyslexic ass read it fast and thought it said Luke was not a freak athlete. 

I'd also probably have Stewart somewhere on the list too because he literally checked every criteria or size, speed, skill and production when on the field. 

I would have liked to see have seen what his numbers could have been if he was the #1 three down back as a rookie. He’s the perfect RB in his prime. 
 

Deangelo Williams was also a tremendous talent. To this day he’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Barry Sanders playing style. He just lacked the extra gear. 
 

But Stew was a power and speed back put together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, OneBadCat said:

I would have liked to see have seen what his numbers could have been if he was the #1 three down back as a rookie. He’s the perfect RB in his prime. 
 

Deangelo Williams was also a tremendous talent. To this day he’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Barry Sanders playing style. He just lacked the extra gear. 
 

But Stew was a power and speed back put together. 

It's crazy we had Stew/Dwill/Cam all in 1 backfield. Sheesh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Physical talent....Peppers, Kuechly, Newton, Stewart, Thomas Davis or Jenkins?

Smith said he was not as talented as other receivers and that made him work to do things in a different way to get results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, csx said:

Physical talent....Peppers, Kuechly, Newton, Stewart, Thomas Davis or Jenkins?

Smith said he was not as talented as other receivers and that made him work to do things in a different way to get results.

Smitty was easily one of the most physical WR's to ever play the game. That's what made him freakish. He had a RB body with WR skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CRA said:

THE Armanti Edwards was more talented than Delhomme.  Heck, you might could make a case he was one of the more talented athletes in Carolina. 

having crazy talent doesn’t = being a good or great NFL player.  

The GOAT is Tom Brady and he wasn’t blessed with crazy physical NFL talent. Brady

had a high IQ, studied, focused on his strengths, focused/driven, leadership, intangibles, etc.  

So how exactly do we define talent in this scenario? Brady, for example, could throw it very far and thread a needle with a pass. But he was slow. Cam was fast and powerful but not as accurate as Brady. Speed is nice and all, but Barry Sanders was about the juke not the speed. A WR who can jump high but can't catch is worthless, but I bet there are dozens and dozens of guys who could catch anything thrown their way but were slow and didn't start. So how do we judge "talent"? Stats? Freakish size? Lord of high school and college ball? Natural god given ability? Maybe it's ... checking off every single box in every possible category for your position? But even then, "Cam wasn't accurate", etc. And come on ... Armanti Edwards did nothing in the NFL. His talent vanished.

So what exactly is "talent"?

 

In no particular order, I think:

1. CMC (could run, catch, pass lol, made people miss, and played smart)

2. Luke (was all over the damn field, intelligence off the charts)

3. Cam (could run, pass, very physical, tons of responsibility on his shoulders)

4. Smitty (could catch, jump, was quick, fast, route god, and could make people miss)

5. Peppers (fast, quick, powerful, no quit in him, blew through Olinemen)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OneBadCat said:

I would have liked to see have seen what his numbers could have been if he was the #1 three down back as a rookie. He’s the perfect RB in his prime. 
 

Deangelo Williams was also a tremendous talent. To this day he’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Barry Sanders playing style. He just lacked the extra gear. 
 

But Stew was a power and speed back put together. 

People sleep on Deangelo cause of personal reasons.. the man was nice. Might have had some resentment with us but went to the Steelers and got an opportunity and started ballin again.. his game could have been something else even with a talent like Stew behind him sharing the carries.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CLG said:

People sleep on Deangelo cause of personal reasons.. the man was nice. Might have had some resentment with us but went to the Steelers and got an opportunity and started ballin again.. his game could have been something else even with a talent like Stew behind him sharing the carries.
 

Stephen Davis never gets any love on this sub. He was pretty damn good as well.

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

    • then we're stuck.  tbh, at this point i would settle for just making it interesting. forget winning a superbowl for now. just get a team that can win games consistently and hope that it's enough to get to the big dance.  we want superman. we aren't getting superman. we had him and we blew our chance with him.  find a way make it work and hope that we can with this little guy and quit wishing our lives away for the second coming of superman. it just ain't happening.
    • Gonna have to strongly disagree with you here. Here are the last 20 Super Bowls - only two of them IMO had QB that didn't play like Superman to get them there/win the game/both, and that was Peyton in 2015 and Ben in 2005. Even then they both had that ability, Peyton was just old and Ben young. That said, there were flashes in the pan like Foles in 2017 and (to a lesser degree) Flacco in 2012. But even counting that, it's 4/20. 20% odds aren't good enough and Bryce was absolutely drafted at #1 to be a guy that elevates an entire team and plays like Superman. If he can't do that then it's a failed pick, full stop. Being a poor man's Teddy doesn't cut it for a #1 overall and that's true for any team, not just Carolina.
    • the problem is if we're waiting for Cam v2, we're going to be waiting decades longer.  our best hope is that bryce is better than we all think he is and that canales is able to work some serious magic with him and the scheme to help him live up anywhere close to the potential we thought he had. he's a smart kid. we just have to be able to have a situation that allows him to use his smarts.  the truth with cam was that een he had to have a system tailored for his skillset coming into the league. the difference between him and luck (which was the debate in '09 when we thought luck was an option) was that with luck, he could be placed in any offense and it would work...hence the higher floor he had  than cam. cam, though, needed an offense that was built around him to reach his potential. he could have done alright in a more pro-style offense, but to reach his ceiling (which was seen by a lot of people as being higher than luck). i don't think having to have an offense tailored around what you can and can't do well is a problem for people who can develop around them...after they've truly identified what those can and can't items are. we didn't have that last year. i think we have that this year. we want a guy who can carry a team on his back, but those kind of guys are very rare. we don't need to spend our time trying  find that guy, because even when you have them there's no guarantee that they will be enough.  championships are won, quite often, by teams who learn to compensate for less than the greatest QB play. you have a great defense and can protect the ball while wearing out the other defense and you've got a chance.  we don't need Bryce to be superman (despite where we drafted him and what we paid to get him). we just need him to be able to run (manage) a good offense. 
×
×
  • Create New...