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 drafted no significant contributors


ncbobcat

Recommended Posts

Well we didn't need impact players, except for the defensive line and we got that with Brown. We needed talented depth at RB and we got that Goodson, we got a potential starter down the road with Martin. We added some talent to our d-line rotation with Irvin and Duke Robinson will become a mauler for us within 2 years. These guys can suck my balls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carolina went 12-4 last season....why in the world would you expect immediate impact when our roster is almost identical in regards to starters. I mean, without looking at the list I assume some weak teams or teams with glaring weaknesses would have a lot of guys on that list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like not needing rookies to start myself.

Wow, it seems that most of you are totally content with the our personnel. What I am basically reading is:

-Returning 99% of starters, obviously no upgrade needed...anywhere

-Pundit basically poo poos our rookie class saying no starters/significant contributors and except in one post, everybody dumps on the article instead of objectively supporting or rejecting the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rookies can contribute and the top of the article even says that Godfrey was one of a handfull of rookies (2-7) to start most of their games last year.

An arugement can be made that:

-Goodson wins 3rd down back role or maybe turns our attack into a 3- headed monster a la the Giants last year.

-Brown unseats Brayton/Johnson as the starting LDE

-Martin beats out Mashall as the starting CB

-Robinson beats out Vincent

-Fiammetta beats out Hoover

Do you want to rely on a team full of rookies? No. But obviously the drafted positions were to challenge, upgrade and add depth. No team...ever...is so talented or has so much depth that their draft was simply to add camp bodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who the heck is Chad Reuter? :confused:

Here's the answer (from his bio):

Chad swears this whole thing started because of the flu.

One day he's holed up on the couch watching the Sun Bowl, the next day he decides he had better start writing about football on the Internet. Soon the radio interview requests come in and NFL teams are calling for information - all the while he's paying off those student loans for his masters in public administration. His thesis could have been "How to be a Better Bureaucrat," if he had been required to write one.

Now on the downward slide toward 40, Chad is trying to make his way through life without ever having a desk job again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, it seems that most of you are totally content with the our personnel. What I am basically reading is:

-Returning 99% of starters, obviously no upgrade needed...anywhere

-Me and a Pundit basically poo poos our rookie class saying no starters/significant contributors and except in one post, everybody dumps on the article instead of objectively supporting or rejecting the article.

fixed it.

i dumped on and rejected the article as well as sentiments of those (you) who believe it. consider it objective or not.

btw...it's 95% of our starters, not 99% returning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, it seems that most of you are totally content with the our personnel. What I am basically reading is:

-Returning 99% of starters, obviously no upgrade needed...anywhere

-Pundit basically poo poos our rookie class saying no starters/significant contributors and except in one post, everybody dumps on the article instead of objectively supporting or rejecting the article.

You are obviously looking for an uprising but you won't get it. Most of those guys on that list were playing for teams with holes. What holes do we have? Last year Godfrey and Otah started as rookies and Stewart contributed. All three areas were places we had holes. This year we don't have the same holes. What rookies out of any of that list for any team would be unseating our starters. Except for maybe right defensive tackle, what spots are weak enough that a rookie could come in and take over?

Brown Fiammetti, Captain and Robinson will all be contributors but won't start due to better guys in front of them. Might have a few more that weren't drafted such a KR, offensive tackle, some special teamers. That is a testament to a team that went 12-4 and could have won 2 more. We went looking for backups and we found them. This is not bad news or something to get upset about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you in disagreement with the article? STs gets you PT, but it doesn't figure into the core of the game. It's one down. Almost all rookies that make the 45 man roster sees time on STs, except starters in some cases because thery are too valuable. We are talikng about the 11 guys on both offense and defense.

Nickel backs, 3rd down backs and rotational players are contributors, but apparently none of the three you mentioned figured to play significant roles according to this guy.

I disagree with the entire concept of the article and the fact the energy it took to write it was wasted by some asshat who thinks he knows anything about what a player who has never touch a NFL field in gametime will do.

I think we are watching a different type of football when you say Special Teams doesn't "figure into the core of the game". Ask Devin Hester if his touchdowns matter better yet find me a football mind who says the old Raiders punter Ray Guy wasn't a Defensive WEAPON.

Nicklebacks see more of the field than any other "reserve" player. How they aren't contributors I can't fathom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are obviously looking for an uprising but you won't get it. Most of those guys on that list were playing for teams with holes. What holes do we have? Last year Godfrey and Otah started as rookies and Stewart contributed. All three areas were places we had holes. This year we don't have the same holes. What rookies out of any of that list for any team would be unseating our starters. Except for maybe right defensive tackle, what spots are weak enough that a rookie could come in and take over?

Brown Fiammetti, Captain and Robinson will all be contributors but won't start due to better guys in front of them. Might have a few more that weren't drafted such a KR, offensive tackle, some special teamers. That is a testament to a team that went 12-4 and could have won 2 more. We went looking for backups and we found them. This is not bad news or something to get upset about.

No, I'm looking for debate about whether people agree with the guy or not. He's saying we got no starting talent this year out of the draft. I agree to the extent of the Peppers situation as it may pertain to Brown. Outside of that, we got reserve players because that is the TALENT we got. I think it is asinine to say that you draft reserve players, you draft players with the hope of them being starters. Now, where the article falls short is what happens to our players beyond their rookie year.

I think we are not solid at all 22 spots on the offense and defense. Most positions yes, all...no.

And to the poster that pointed out the 95%, actually it's 95.45455%. I understand you rounded though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The bottom line is we saw long stretches this season where T-Mac wasn't even targeted.  He had games where he went an entire half without seeing a pass thrown his way, and it lead to a bunch of games with 5 or less targets.  If he's healthy and we're not up a stupid amount and only running the ball, I can't see him having more than a game or two next year with 5 or less targets. We were also only 22nd this year in pass attempts, and that was with a rookie #1 and no legitimate 2nd option for half the season.  And even then, we were only 46 pass attempts above 31st place. If we go into next season with T-Mac improved in his 2nd season and a healthy Coker for 17 games, there is absolutely no reason for us to not throw it more.  That right away increases both of their target totals without sacrificing any targets from each other or other players, add in them taking targets from the TEs and RBs on top of that, and your argument just doesn't hold water anymore. You can't look at targets/yards in a vacuum and think next year Coker just takes some from T-Mac.  You have to look at the team as a whole and our situations this year and then project what will happen next year. If he's healthy for 17 games, I'd bet my life savings that T-Mac sees increases across the board, targets/catches/yards/TDs.   Just as Coker will also see career highs in all categories, it's not one vs the other, it's shifting offensive strategy given our personnel, which next year will be much better for our passing game (QB issues aside).
    • C'mon now.... First, you can't switch up your argument once someone points out a major flaw in your point. You're saying we shouldn't expect a big increase in targets/yards for T-Mac, but then shift to talking about averages with Chase when I point out the significant leap he took there once you factor in his missing games.  He saw an increase in targets in 5 less games, averages aside, he saw a significant increase in targets in his 2nd season, what he then did with those targets is actually irrelevant in this discussion. Puka seeing no increase is pointless, as he saw such an absurd amount of targets for a rookie, it's near impossible to see an increase. But the real issue in this post is that you think I'm proving your point by showing how Waddle had to share targets with Hill. Tyreek Hill was a 1st team All Pro who was 2nd in the NFL in yards that season. If you think Jaylen Waddle sharing targets with a 1st team All Pro and a future HOFer is even remotely in the same category as T-Mac needing to share targets with Coker... then you are certifiably insane, lol. If anything, you could make the argument that Coker is to Waddle as T-Mac is to Hill in that discussion (which would then lead to a serious increase in targets/yards for T-Mac).  But even that is insane, as neither T-Mac or Coker will be as good as Hill and Waddle respectively that season.  I love both of their potential, but c'mon now, T-Mac isn't getting 119 catches for 1,700 yards and Coker isn't getting 117 for 1,350 next season.
×
×
  • Create New...