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!

     

Why don't we use our tight ends?


The Question

Recommended Posts

I try not to watch too much football outside of the Panthers out of frustration. Frustration spanning from watching other teams with less talent than us pick people apart down the field with their tight ends. Simple routes. Simple throws. First downs. We have arguably 2 very talented tight ends in the passing game that never seemed to be utilized. Rosario is practically a Kellen Winslow clone and he sure as hell hurt us pretty bad. Why do we never use them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish we could get a real answer on this because if we are/have been working on our passing game this is the easiest way to complete passes. It's actually kind of funny we don't use them and we have been trying to improve our passing since the first preseason game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try not to watch too much football outside of the Panthers out of frustration. Frustration spanning from watching other teams with less talent than us pick people apart down the field with their tight ends. Simple routes. Simple throws. First downs. We have arguably 2 very talented tight ends in the passing game that never seemed to be utilized. Rosario is practically a Kellen Winslow clone and he sure as hell hurt us pretty bad. Why do we never use them?

Because John Fox is our HC.

That is all....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
    • You're really gonna pass up the opportunity to make a joke about skidmarks in underwear here?  Alright fine.
×
×
  • Create New...