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!

     

Official Panthers Visits/Prospect Meetings Tracker


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Bear Hands said:

Ben Sinnott is a really intriguing TE prospect. Like the dude a lot for us 

me too.  I think we will go TE some how some way

I wonder how many of those edges were before Clowney signed. 

I like to look for patterns--some of these names are to show interest to players who might go undrafted.

Here is what I noticed--

  • NO true Centers.  There are no signs that we might take a Center in the draft.  On this list, Haynes is listed as a C/G but he did not play C at UConn.  RG.
  • The Morgan influence suggests that they might take an ILB "dawg" early.  Wilson and Cooper are mid second rounders at least--if not earlier.
  • They are really doing homework on the WRs.  We have met with 8 of them.  Could we take 2?
  • To me, it is scary that they have checked out Wiggins (CB Clemson).  175 lbs and not good in run support---we need our CBs to come up and contain.  He reminds me of Henderson.  Someone talk me out of it.
  • I do not understand the lack of attention to the CB position.  Neither RIchardson nor Wiggins are good in run support, and Richardson is simply not a good CB considering his athleticism.  He is a fifth or sixth rounder imo. 
  • Based on these lists, I would say WR and ILB in the second round.  TE maybe in the third.

 

 

  • Pie 6
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, MHS831 said:
  • NO true Centers.  There are no signs that we might take a Center in the draft.  On this list, Haynes is listed as a C/G but he did not play C at UConn.  RG.

I added the C next to his name. Daniel Jeremiah mentioned Haynes can play all 3 interior spots during the NFL Combine 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MHS831 said:

me too.  I think we will go TE some how some way

I wonder how many of those edges were before Clowney signed. 

I like to look for patterns--some of these names are to show interest to players who might go undrafted.

Here is what I noticed--

  • NO true Centers.  There are no signs that we might take a Center in the draft.  On this list, Haynes is listed as a C/G but he did not play C at UConn.  RG.
  • The Morgan influence suggests that they might take an ILB "dawg" early.  Wilson and Cooper are mid second rounders at least--if not earlier.
  • They are really doing homework on the WRs.  We have met with 8 of them.  Could we take 2?
  • To me, it is scary that they have checked out Wiggins (CB Clemson).  175 lbs and not good in run support---we need our CBs to come up and contain.  He reminds me of Henderson.  Someone talk me out of it.
  • I do not understand the lack of attention to the CB position.  Neither RIchardson nor Wiggins are good in run support, and Richardson is simply not a good CB considering his athleticism.  He is a fifth or sixth rounder imo. 
  • Based on these lists, I would say WR and ILB in the second round.  TE maybe in the third.

 

 

Agree with everything in your assessment. I think Gilmore may still be in our future. Don’t forget we resigned Troy Hill who should start at nickel. He is really good at run support and he can help on the outside too.

Edited by Beast_3000
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pantherclaw said:

There is no direct correlation between visits/senior bowl interviews and whom actually gets drafted.  

It may happen. It may not. Yes, the odds are high it may be. No sure thing.

I was gonna make this disclaimer too.

Many of the guys teams meet with are for a reason. Not always the case teams are sold-these are job interviews at the end of the day.

Could mean they saw promise on tape but heard weird things about the guy.

So many possibilities and sometimes a guy that is on these lists could have quietly been scratched off our board entirely due to, well a bad interview or visit. 

  • 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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • 1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control  Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst roster in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most voliate franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete diaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
    • I think he has started to build a culture here.  I think if we had a qb with no limitations we would be seeing a lot more with the offense.  I think most of the coaches that come in and instantly win went to teams that were underachieving previously based on roster talent level.  Based on our roster talent,  we werent underachieving,  we were just bad.
×
×
  • Create New...