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!

     

Connor Vs. Kuechly


xtheronx

Recommended Posts

I'm torn over the Kuechly pick .. here's why:

Why would we let Dan Connor go to Dallas for the following contract:

2 years - $6.5 million

Break Down: $2.7 million signing bonus - 2012 $800k - 2013 $3 million - 2014 free agent

And then use our first round pick to sign Kuechly for (approximately):

$12 million (over 4 years) .. he will VERY likely earn a similar amount that Connor will earn next year with Dallas (including his signing bonus)

Here's my dilemma .. if Connor was an above average player .. and was familiar with our system .. and has proven he can play at this level .. why spend more/same on an unproven player?

We could have re-signed Connor and used our first pick on a CB, DT, WR, etc.

Maybe I'm naive .. but I just don't understand how teams let good players go in free agency and then replace them with someone who might be better. Especially with the 9th pick in the draft!!

I'm I the only one who feels this way? My point is .. we already had this guy on our roster (Connor) .. so why waste the draft pick?

(I've rushed putting this post together .. I hope it makes sense)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conner probably wanted somewhere to start, FOR SURE. I also don't believe he can play on outside, where this guy can, so he's more versatile. I don't think they liked what they saw out of Conner, he had almost a whole season to show what he has and while I think he played OK, I expected more out of him (granted our defense was bad all around).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides their skin color, Connor is nothing compared to Kuechly.

You may be right .. BUT .. you may also be wrong

Don't forget .. Connor was two-time all American .. set Penn State's record in tackles .. and won the Chuck Bednarik Award

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may be right .. BUT .. you may also be wrong

Don't forget .. Connor was two-time all American .. set Penn State's record in tackles .. and won the Chuck Bednarik Award

I don't care what he is. He is slow, unathletic, awful in coverage, and completely worthless in our system.

If we still had John Fox, we would have probably held onto him. Rivera knows poo when he sees it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conner probably wanted somewhere to start, FOR SURE. I also don't believe he can play on outside, where this guy can, so he's more versatile. I don't think they liked what they saw out of Conner, he had almost a whole season to show what he has and while I think he played OK, I expected more out of him (granted our defense was bad all around).

Yeah I agree with all of this for sure ... but we would have been fine at LB with Connor is my point

Then we would have had the bonus of using the #9 pick on another position of need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...