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!

     

Espn insider:do not cut deangelo williams


micnificent28

Recommended Posts

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8932280/which-high-priced-players-cut-which-kept-nfl

Don't cut: DeAngelo Williams

The Panthers have 47 running backs, and they have work to do with the passing game, which is why they also have a new GM. But they should at least look to restructure the deal of the back who was easily the best one on the roster in 2012. Cutting Williams saves about $4.8M against the 2013 cap, but Jonathan Stewart and Mike Tolbert were far less efficient.

I ve seen tons of arguements for why we should cut him. But very few saying why we should keep him... what say you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When this team will be a legit title contender in a few years, Deangelo isn't going to be the RB of that team, it will be Stewart

So just get rid of Deangelo now, save the money, use it where it's needed more than RB, and let Stewart grow along with Cam and the rest of the offense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When this team will be a legit title contender in a few years, Deangelo isn't going to be the RB of that team, it will be Stewart

So just get rid of Deangelo now, save the money, use it where it's needed more than RB, and let Stewart grow along with Cam and the rest of the offense

Stewart cant even stay on the field, why should we put all our chips in him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stewart cant even stay on the field, why should we put all our chips in him?

Before this season he missed two games in his entire career

Then he had both a high ankle and regular ankle sprain on the same play that essentially finished his season due to our record, I'm sure he would have been able to play had we been in the playoff hunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put the chips on the OL and it makes less difference who you have back there--Tauren Poole could average 3.5 yards a game like DW did. Most RBs hit the wall at 30, and DW is no different. If it were up to me, I would rarely sign a RB to a second contract. There are too many decent backs out there, while good OL are hard to find.

(As for the ever so humorous attempt to derail this thread by a moderator, why are some of the moderators the biggest pricks on this forum? Sorry in advance to all the kids out there trying to discuss and learn about the Panthers. There are some unbalanced dweebs who were not breast fed that feel a need to measure their self worth by throwing zingers at others to get pie from other pricks. In person, I doubt they are like that at all because their employers, probably all a part of the dynamic fast food industry, do not have dental plans for part timers working their way through CPCC's GED program.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for deangelo staying. We just need to give him more carries. I hope this year we lean more on the run game and use play action more. I honestly believe that if we run deangelo right, he will have a 1,000 yard year. He is nowhere near being finished. About the cap? That's not my job to worry about it. I'll leave that up to the powers that be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yep. I was hoping for and calling for a day three guy. But I didn’t research the position to say if we should or should‘t have jumped at a particular guy at a particular spot.    And everything I read said it was a poor draft for RBs depth wise. I guess when Seattle takes a backup RB in the 1st, that kind of backs that up.    I definitely think we should keep 4 running backs and if King can play well enough then keep him too.    I believe I heard Canales say we are a running team (talking about drafting a WR he will be needing to block as well as catch). Well if we are gonna be a running team by identity we don’t need to stock the WR room to overflowing. If one room has to sacrifice, it should not be the RB room given our circumstances. 
    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
    • I just saw the funniest thing...or very disappointing, depending how you handle misery. A guy on YouTube did a 2027 'way too early' mock draft.  If I told you the simulator has the Panthers selecting in the top 10 , what would you say?  If I told you it was pick #8 and only two QBs were taken in the top 7, what would you say?  If I told you this dude had us taking a defensive player, what would you say?
×
×
  • Create New...