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 Apparently "love" Luke Kuechly


Gabeking

Recommended Posts

I have no problem drafting Keuchly if the team is doubtful about Beason and Davis' return. It's actually a really smart move IMO.

The issue I took is with the comment that he would play over Anderson. That, in my opinion, is a pretty radical statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why we will be passing him over.

If Coples, Claiborne, Blackmon don't fall....Luke has a great shot. Rivera is the anti Fox....if he says DT isn't a huge need he won't grab one when he can get the same caliber one in the 2nd.

Rivera needs D talent. Luke is BPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem drafting Keuchly if the team is doubtful about Beason and Davis' return. It's actually a really smart move IMO.

The issue I took is with the comment that he would play over Anderson. That, in my opinion, is a pretty radical statement.

Nothing is too out there for a BKJS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem drafting Keuchly if the team is doubtful about Beason and Davis' return. It's actually a really smart move IMO.

The issue I took is with the comment that he would play over Anderson. That, in my opinion, is a pretty radical statement.

Again, I would ask....was a rookie Beason a better LB than current day Anderson? Luke won't ride the bench with a 80% Beason, Anderson, and random guy inserted into the WLB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I would ask....was a rookie Beason a better LB than current day Anderson? Luke won't ride the bench with a 80% Beason, Anderson, and random guy inserted into the WLB.

To be fair to Anderson he didn't get a fair chance until injuries occurred, but to answer your question... yes, Beason was a better rookie than a current day Anderson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do be fair to Anderson he didn't get a fair chance until injuries occurred, but to answer your question... yes, Beason was a better rookie than a current day Anderson.

You think Beason was a better prospect coming out than Luke? He wasn't...So why wouldn't Luke be better than just a guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was the better prospect Aaron Curry or Luke....answer it.

Luke.

Don't confuse someone labeling one player safe and slotted at position x in one draft as meaning they are better than someone in another draft.

Also, Curry and Luke are different LBs. Simple and plain. Different strengths/weaknesses.

All I watch practically is ACC football...how much of Luke have you seen the past few years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kuechly is weird. He's not a hitter, not very aggressive and has a lot of mop up plays. He does have elite instincts and is really really smart with a good work ethic. The Anti-Burfict.

Anyways, I don't see the value where we pick. Trading back? Sure. At #9? Ehhhh... There's a dearth of first round LB talent this year and Kuechly is benefiting greatly from it. There's a TON of talented guys outside of the first we could grab.

I mean, if you were the Patriots, would you grab Mayo top ten again?

I do think it's sort of funny that a lot of the "combine means nothing, look at the tape" guys reverse field when it comes to Kuechly. Pre-combine, watching his games (not film, I don't have film and neither do you) he doesn't look super athletic, doesn't look like a 4.5 guy.. he looks like a classic MLB who makes a lot of tackles and doesn't do much else well. Then he blows up at the combine and now he's a freak-cyborg who can play any LB position, blitz like a pro, cover any TE, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...