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!

     

Jalen Coker …is he a lock!

Iceup

By Iceup,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Iceup Collaborator

Iceup

Posted
Posted (edited)

https://x.com/KeepPurringBen/status/1818693758621282638
 

Apparently Coker got a really good contract for a UDFA. The Draftnetwork seems to think that makes him a lock to make the roster.

If this is true then, the way I see it, Thielan, XL, Dionte, and probably Mingo are all locks as well. ISM may also be because of his special teams contribution. Does that mean TMJ is gone? How do you think the WR room shakes out? Who stays? Who is cut?

Edited by Iceup
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricky Spanish Grand Master

Ricky Spanish

Posted
Posted

It's not a lock. A few years back Carson Strong got the biggest UDFA contract from the eagles then barely played or practiced in camp/preseason, then was let go.

Of course Coker has already shown more in the short time he's been around than Strong did, but the money is not a factor.

I really hope he is spending his time glued to Thielen's hip since they have very similar styles (Not burners, route runners with good hands) and were both UDFAs. A ton of useful knowledge/experience he could get there.

  • Pie 7
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

It's not a lock. A few years back Carson Strong got the biggest UDFA contract from the eagles then barely played or practiced in camp/preseason, then was let go.

Of course Coker has already shown more in the short time he's been around than Strong did, but the money is not a factor.

I really hope he is spending his time glued to Thielen's hip since they have very similar styles (Not burners, route runners with good hands) and were both UDFAs. A ton of useful knowledge/experience he could get there.

carson strong

 

holy poo who was the dude pimping him as the best qb in that class?

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

Basbear

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

It's not a lock. A few years back Carson Strong got the biggest UDFA contract from the eagles then barely played or practiced in camp/preseason, then was let go.

Of course Coker has already shown more in the short time he's been around than Strong did, but the money is not a factor.

I really hope he is spending his time glued to Thielen's hip since they have very similar styles (Not burners, route runners with good hands) and were both UDFAs. A ton of useful knowledge/experience he could get there.

I think the ark C got a similar contract as well. You are right, crazy as it sounds spending a few hundred thousand on UDFAs and cutting them before the season is just part of the business. I know you remember the hair dude underwood(?) that Dave gave him like 400,000-600,000 SB and he didn't make the roster. It happens too much, but that's just the current market. 

I honestly thought Dan had a better UDFA haul than his draft haul. He spent a high amount and was very aggressive. Couple guys should make the team and few should be on the PS. He got some talent and wasted money, but that's the only way. 

 

 https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/_/id/91441/andrew-raym

 

I don't think he makes the team. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Iceup Collaborator

Iceup

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I agree with most of what has been said in this thread. Thompkins, Coker, ISM may all also be replaced by other camp cuts later too. I read an article today predicting the Chiefs cut Mecole Hardman again. He’d be an upgrade over ISM probably. Someone will get cut and steal a spot here at some point more than likely.

Edited by Iceup
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...