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!

     

Hoover: Panthers in 'opportunity to fail'


scpanther22

Recommended Posts

Teams don't just draft FBs because they lack talent...

Fiammetta was one of the strongest FBs and possibly the best overall out of his class last year... He'll do just fine becoming our starter, thank you very much...

Blind loyalty is a plague that strikes deep within the heart of the Panthers fan base...

How about we give the young guy a chance before we write him off and only remember a guy who isn't even a Panther anymore?

^This.

Also, I think it is funny how most of the optimists from last year are now pessimists and vice versa. I don't blame Hoover for being pissed, but it is clear that we're going in a different direction and he had to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

at first I didnt like the Hoover cut. He is a great blocking FB with experience and we are a run first team. I figured his loss would hurt our run game but I was looking back at past games he missed and we did fine without him so thus I think we made the right choice. Hoover doesnt really have any skills other than blocking and I think we could get someone with more versatility to replace him. I don't know if Fiammetta is going to be the answer but he was the #1 full back in the draft and the scouts seem to think he is the full package from this quote

Pick Analysis: Fiammetta was the best fullback in the draft. He is an excellent blocker yet he has rushing skills, as he was a running back coming out of high school. He also has excellent receiving skills. His blocking is not to be dismissed, though, and he really beefs up an already-powerful Panthers rushing attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a good example. My peer is my supervisor. And again, if the players are coaching, then why do we have coaches?

Coaches give the meat and veteran players provide the potatoes. While you might not be a good example, my tenured peers give me some finite details that my supervisor doesn't have the time for because he's busy running a company. Also, players and coaches don't tend to hang out with one another, players do. You would be shocked at the nuggets gleened when a setting is more casual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's damn near impossible to definitively answer this without working in the FO, anything else is premature speculation.

Okay, the argument to the contrary is premature specualtion then as well. Agreed, only the FO knows the real reason, but the trend lends to the premise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you optimists are missing the elephant in the room. One of the worst injuries for a fullback is not back spasms but concussions. Their job is to act like a battering ram and charge headlong into the line trying to pile drive through the defense to create a hole. Can you tell me a worse position to have a guy who missed several games as a rookie with a concussion to play. Maybe middle linebacker. I have grave concerns that Fiametta doesn't make it through this year without a reoccurence. That leaves us nobody. Yeah I know that having a concussion is no guarantee of another but who is to say he hasn't had one in college already. Fiametta may be younger but he has not shown to be durable or reliable so far. Sometimes you go beyond cutting the fat and cut the meat as well. I think in this case we went too far in our zeal to save money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...