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!

     

Steve Smith and Cameron Wolfe discuss Bryce and the Receiving Corps

jfra78

By jfra78,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, CRA said:

I mean, maybe I’m missing someone but what QB is out there winning with a receiving corp by committee?   MVP caliber QBs?   And even a Brady or a Cam had dominant TEs in the passing era years they did great with bland WR corps. 

Cam did in 2015.  Jake did it in 2003.  Cam elevated everyone's play including Olsen in 2015. We had the supposed worse receivers in the league when Benjamin was hurt.  Jake had Moose and a Smitty who was years away from greatness. If that was our team alone there are tons of examples. And no Brady had crap for receivers much of his time there. All he had was a tight end to go to.

Edited by panthers55
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Cam did in 2015.  Jake did it in 2003.  Cam elevated everyone's play including Olsen in 2015. We had the supposed worse receivers in the league when Benjamin was hurt.  Jake had Moose and a Smitty who was years away from greatness. If that was our team alone there are tons of examples. And no Brady had crap for receivers much of his time there. All he had was a tight end to go to.

I already addressed Cam.  Or Brady.  Or Lamar or Mahomes.  If you got a MVP caliber QB and a Pro TE.....they can make a weak WR cast work.   That's not the model we are playing out in 2023. 

89 wasn't years away from greatness.  He was instantly great when given the opportunity in 2003.  Dominate postseason in 2003.  The best season of his career was his next healthy one after that season.  And Moose wasn't some JAG either in 2003.   Add to all that a top 10 defense, Pro Bowl in the backfield, roided up OL. 

I just don't see all these comparisons people are trying to make.  We got a rookie QB and a bland cast around him this year.  It is what it is.  It's good enough to develop Bryce some.  But we need better skill position talent around.  Don't see how that is that big of a debate. 

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaRideorDie Mentor

CarolinaRideorDie

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, rayzor said:

If you've got a clutch intelligent playmaker QB, he turns the WRs into big play WRs. It's all about opportunity and a QB like Bryce sees and takes advantage of opportunities in clutch situations.

Of course I will always take a playmaker QB over a playmaker WR, a great QB will have more impact than a great WR. Young played lights out with Jameson Williams and Metchie during his sophomore year and he continued to play well his junior year despite throwing to nobodies. Our current WR room is unproven outside of Theilan and I hope they just haven't been able to prove themselves because of poor QB play, I hope someone steps up this year. It's time for Terrace and Leviska to show up or get out! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackie Lee Grand Master

Jackie Lee

Posted
Posted
On 7/11/2023 at 8:42 AM, panthers55 said:

If you think about it receiver by committee means you can't shut us down by concentrating on 1 or 2 players. Instead of 1 1400 yards receiver we might have 3 guys with 500 yards a piece. Instead of a negative it could be a positive.

Cams MVP year was with jags, I do believe it makes the opposing defense have to second guess a lot more when game planning. If the QB sucks it doesn't matter either way

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, CRA said:

I already addressed Cam.  Or Brady.  Or Lamar or Mahomes.  If you got a MVP caliber QB and a Pro TE.....they can make a weak WR cast work.   That's not the model we are playing out in 2023. 

89 wasn't years away from greatness.  He was instantly great when given the opportunity in 2003.  Dominate postseason in 2003.  The best season of his career was his next healthy one after that season.  And Moose wasn't some JAG either in 2003.   Add to all that a top 10 defense, Pro Bowl in the backfield, roided up OL. 

I just don't see all these comparisons people are trying to make.  We got a rookie QB and a bland cast around him this year.  It is what it is.  It's good enough to develop Bryce some.  But we need better skill position talent around.  Don't see how that is that big of a debate. 

To your point, Smitty had almost 1200 yards and Moose had 800 some... We don't have a single receiver that we could expect to be near Moose or Smitty's abilities in 2003. We actually do have someone that reminds me of Proehl, though, and it's possible TMJ or others step up in unexpected ways...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CPcavedweller Veteran

CPcavedweller

Posted
Posted

Steve mentions 0-22 yard range as being Bryce's bresd and butter, while acknowledging he's not going to uncork the ball. If he can somehow get to the point where Brees was that a 60 yard throw isn't impossible, or improbable, he could be very, very good. But if he has trouble stretching the field, that opens up a whole new window of aggression for safeties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pup McBarky Proficient

Pup McBarky

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, CPcavedweller said:

If he can somehow get to the point where Brees was that a 60 yard throw isn't impossible, or improbable, he could be very, very good.

Brees attempted over 9400 passes while with the Saints, none of which traveled more than 50 yards in the air.

https://thespun.com/top-stories/look-crazy-passing-stat-about-drew-brees-jameis-winston

Edited by Pup McBarky
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
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...