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!

     

Panthers Select Xavier Legette WR - Pick 32, Round 1


Bear Hands
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Tr3ach said:

Xl did literally nothing for 4 years.  At least AD had boom or bust potential with a much higher ceiling.

I mean Leggette has a crazy high ceiling.  

what did you want Leggette to do in that offense when they were playing grad coaches at QB or WRs? The minute they got a somewhat decent QB he started to shine and make massive growth strides. 

I feel better about XL than Mingo. But I think Ladd was the best pairing for checkdown Young 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MillionDollarCam said:

From all the smoke around Legette, it seems Canales already has an idea of how he wants to use X.

While he (Legette) wasn’t my first choice, I’m very high on Canales so I trust that he’ll make it work.

Wish more people had this mindset instead of just going straight to bitching 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, top dawg said:

They are hardly the same receiver. You know as well as I do, that you go and get your guy. Ladd is good, but somewhat redundant. He also has a bit of an injury history. AD is kinda soft. There were concerns with him.

Yeah we had a preference.  No big deal, I'll root for him--like I told you, I expected it, and have tried to warm up to it.  I'm just miffed at how obvious we made it.  This trend continues under a third regime for Tepper. 

  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CRA said:

I mean Leggette has a crazy high ceiling.  

what did you want Leggette to do in that offense when they were playing grad coaches at QB or WRs? The minute they got a somewhat decent QB he started to shine and make massive growth strides. 

I feel better about XL than Mingo. But I think Ladd was the best pairing for checkdown Young 

I wanted him to run decent routes or get seperation. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They visited  with him like 6 times it seems... its clear they worked him extensively  and something they saw behind the scenes really clicked.  I'd keep an eye on Rattler or even Milton as a late qb too but Leggettes value as a returner and Deebo role will be his role initially. 

  • Pie 2
  • 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

  • Posts

    • I heard one analyst say that Parsons is (or was relative to the same age) a better player than Mack. Could be recency bias, but I'd say that that's absolutely true.
    • Watson is a cautionary tale because he pulled that trade coming off a full year he didn’t play due to injury and then almost a whole other full season due to an 11 game suspension for being a creep.  If Parsons was coming off all of that, I’d agree - we don’t do it.  But Parsons has been mentioned with the likes of LT and Mack.  If we could swing it, we should do it.  I don’t think the cowboys would trade him in-conference, but we’ve seen wilder things happen before (McRib to WSH).
    • Saw a post somewhere earlier that said what the Bears gave up for Khalil Mack would be a fair comp as to what to expect it would take to get Parsons.  But Parsons is actually a year younger than Mack was at that point, and also, I believe Mack was named an all-pro at two different positions that prior year, iirc…  but I think Parsons is as equally versatile. we should definitely see what it would cost, at minimum.
×
×
  • Create New...