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!

     

Michael Brockers, DT, LSU

JawnyBlaze

By JawnyBlaze,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

DaCityKats Newbie

DaCityKats

Posted
Posted

yeah their DL is pretty good. Brockers played well this season and Mingo is an absolute freak. him and Sam are very athletic DE's that could also probably play some 3-4 OLB. they also had a freshmen DT that was pretty good cant remember his name but he wears #56.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted

i think it's best to stay away from Dline prospects on a good Dline....for the first round anyway.

it's too hard to see if they were the product of a good line or good on their own.

good point. Take the guy who gets doubled every week and still gets the job done. Not any in this draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

ok...i've been doing some looking into this kid and i'm liking him more and more.

still really raw and he probably won't go in the draft this year but if he did he might be the top DT in the class. of course competition is pretty crappy, but still i think he'd be better than a guy like still or whoever else.

i've seen some remarks saying that if he entered the draft this year he would be a top 10 pick. saw a comment from a guy talking to a scout that said he would be the 2nd taken in the draft. now i don't know about that, but i've seen comparisons to suh.

about what i said earlier re: him being maybe a product of a good dline, the people talking about that defense on the team said that they consider him the anchor not just of the Dline but of the defense itself.

there isn't much in the way of highlights that i can find but one of them is a very athletic diving INT and another was a blocked FG attempt in the NCG(?).

the dude is a physical freak and could very well be one of these guys who can make an impact right away.

i'm not crazy about taking a DT in round 1 this year, but i think this guy could make a strong case for being taken as early as we will be picking.

as a prospect i like him more than just about any DT.

that may change in time, but thats certainly the direction i'm heading, fwiw (which isn't much).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

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...