Jon Beason willing to move to OLB for Team

[redbuddha]

I don't understand the unwritten rules or hiearchy of this message board. Some people can post articles, get rep, pie, likes community approval. I do it and am treated like a pariah. What gives? Hell I didn't write the article, I am only posting it for others to read.

[rayzor]

Morgan is no Connor.

ugh....

Carolina Panthers

Dan Morgan was selected by the Carolina Panthers in the first round, with the 11th overall selection, in the 2001 NFL Draft.

In the 2001 season, he started 11 games at weakside and strongside linebacker, posting 75 tackles, 1 sack, 1 interception and 1 fumble recovery.

His second season, Morgan helped turn the Panthers from the worst defense in the 2001 NFL season to the second-ranked defense, becoming the first team to make such an improvement in one season. Morgan was also an integral part of the Panthers defense that led the team to Super Bowl XXXVIII, where he posted a total of 18 tackles (11 solo, 7 assists).^[2] For the 2004 NFL season, he collected 109 tackles, two interceptions, two fumble recoveries and five sacks en route to being named the starting linebacker for the NFC in the 2004 Pro Bowl. In the 2005 NFL season, he was second on the team in tackles, behind Marlon McCree.

[rayzor]

I don't understand the unwritten rules or hiearchy of this message board. Some people can post articles, get rep, pie, likes community approval. I do it and am treated like a pariah. What gives? Hell I didn't write the article, I am only posting it for others to read.

huh?

not sure what you're talking about but don't take this poo so seriously.

[stankowalski]

Yeah...Morgan was no McCree either. Forgot about him.

[mwright350]

I don't understand the unwritten rules or hiearchy of this message board. Some people can post articles, get rep, pie, likes community approval. I do it and am treated like a pariah. What gives? Hell I didn't write the article, I am only posting it for others to read.

1) Why so serious?

2) Bleacher Report - bad!

3) Pie is virtually arbitrary, rep is not a scarlet letter, and people on the internet are fickle

4) Bleacher Report - bad!

5) Also Bleacher Report is terrible.

[redbuddha]

After I posted a link to the article. Half of the first page response, was I was an idiot for quoting bleacher report. Then somebody comes on and says similar article is on nfl.com.

[csx]

After I posted a link to the article. Half of the first page response, was I was an idiot for quoting bleacher report. Then somebody comes on and says similar article is on nfl.com.

you sir, deserve a badge

[panthers55]

I know this is a novel concept but why not do like Rivera suggests and use training camp and the preseason to decide where each linebacker best fits instead of making proclamations about what we should do or what would be stupid or wise before the season even starts. Who knows at this point what Kuechly will be best doing or how far Beason has recovered. I love people who say that Kuechly for example shouldn't play Will because that is not his strength when he hasn't even taken 1 snap in the NFL. At this point we don't even know what scheme we will be using most of the time absolutely.

[rayzor]

After I posted a link to the article. Half of the first page response, was I was an idiot for quoting bleacher report. Then somebody comes on and says similar article is on nfl.com.

it's always better to quote the original post/article or link.

bleacher report has a deserved bad reputation around here and most places because they let anyone...and i mean ANYONE write for them. Since they don't pay they have no standards. all they want is content so they don't care what is there. any person with an opinion can write an "article" for them. great for those who think they have something that people care to read but bad for anyone who goes there thinking that they are getting anything more than just some old joe's uneducated and poorly written out thoughts.

as a rule, they are not a reliable source....and that's being nice.

if the article is taken from another source, like this one, just quote the original or link to the original. when you link to another source you are giving them undeserved credit.

[panthers55]

After I posted a link to the article. Half of the first page response, was I was an idiot for quoting bleacher report. Then somebody comes on and says similar article is on nfl.com.

It is really simple. If you quote bleacher report you disparage the site but defend the article as worthy. That way you cover your bases. For example:

Here is an article from Bleacher Report. Yeah I know it is only Bleacher report but the article is actually pretty decent and the information is better than some of the other stuff on NFl.com or ESPN........................

That way it cuts down on the negative anti-Bleacher report posts and get the information across. And recognize that if you quote Bleacher Report even the best articles get some negative backlash because the site also contains some very amateurish and awful articles as well.

[rayzor]

It is really simple. If you quote bleacher report you disparage the site but defend the article as worthy. That way you cover your bases. For example:

Here is an article from Bleacher Report. Yeah I know it is only Bleacher report but the article is actually pretty decent and the information is better than some of the other stuff on NFl.com or ESPN........................

That way it cuts down on the negative anti-Bleacher report posts and get the information across. And recognize that if you quote Bleacher Report even the best articles get some negative backlash because the site also contains some very amateurish and awful articles as well.

i would think it's fair to say that most articles on the site fit into that category.