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!

     

Any idea why short hasn't earned a starting spot next to star?

micnificent28

By micnificent28,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

micnificent28 Veteran

micnificent28

Posted
Posted

I mean from what i've seen he's been every bit as good as Edwards when allowed to play. You draft a guy in the second round i exspect him to start. He's proven to be one of the best pass rush Dt's in this class so why not let him play like one.Don't get me wrong Edwards hasn't done anything to lose his job and is playing beyond servicable. But the question remains when is it Short's time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackofalltrades Proficient

Jackofalltrades

Posted
Posted

I think it depends on the rotation they want to use to match up. Our big thing is shutting down the run and Edwards and Cole give you more than Short in that department. He also benefits from staying fresh, so I'm fine with it.

 

I do think he'll be the starter next season with Star and Dwan will be relegated to the rotational guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Montsta Proficient

Montsta

Posted
Posted

I don't think the coaching staff is really worried about it right now. We have such a deep rotation of DT's, the one that technically gets the start is somewhat insignificant. I'd be interested to see how the defensive snap counts breakdown for our DT's, because they seem to be on a fairly even rotation outside of Star who gets the bulk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
Posted

Don't confuse starting with "stupid" no where did i say he should play every snap.

No, but you do realize that "starting" only means they put you out there for the first play of the game your unit is on the field, right? If he's getting a set percentage of snaps then it's definitely for a reason, most likely due to his current developmental progress as a player. NFL rookies take at least a whole year to adjust to the demands of pro level football. Just because he's doing good with so many snaps doesn't mean that he'd produce as efficiently playing more snaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

No, but you do realize that "starting" only means they put you out there for the first play of the game your unit is on the field, right? If he's getting a set percentage of snaps then it's definitely for a reason, most likely due to his current developmental progress as a player. NFL rookies take at least a whole year to adjust to the demands of pro level football. Just because he's doing good with so many snaps doesn't mean that he'd produce as efficiently playing more snaps.

for positions that have pretty heavy rotation...being designated as a "starter" doesn't mean a whole lot except that you are there for the first snap.

 

cole is just better on the first couple downs when teams decide to run (which is when they are more likely to do that).

 

it's really not that big of a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • L-TownCat
      Report: Panthers great Luke Kuechly being eyed for big TV job

      By L-TownCat · Posted

      So the last guy who had the job got hired by his former team directly into a role he has no direct experience in?
    • Khyber53
      Report: Panthers great Luke Kuechly being eyed for big TV job

      By Khyber53 · Posted

      Hard to pass up millions for a couple of days work per week for a coaching gig in the NFL that is 60-80 hours each week during the season and a more relaxed 50 hours a week during the off season. Yeah, I'd love to see him as our DC but hard to see him giving up the cushy job there if he gets it. And he's going to be a great commentator for the network.
    • Khyber53
      2027: Sharing my thoughts on the cap without a lotta research

      By Khyber53 · Posted

      Really, I think that is where negotiations come in. If you've got a QB getting you to 10 wins but statistically he's not a great performer, then you say look you can take $22 million or you can try it on the market. Because let's face it, out there, any leadership skills that we're seeing aren't going to be on the table, it's just going to be performance and that lands him in the QB2 market, which is much, much less lucrative (although any of us would love that money).  No one is saying that Bryce will be a $50 million QB, barring something short of a miraculous jump. I'm just saying that if we are winning somehow with him at the helm, then it would be fuging stupid to dive back into the rookie pool all over again. Let's say we do hit the 10 win mark, heck, let's call it 11 and a second round in the playoffs. I think we can all say that would be a really uplifting result and one that should be doable if we have good play. What do we do then? Here's what I would offer if I were Morgan and Tepper. $25 million a year for 3 years, each year with up to $10 million in incentives for touchdowns, wins, playoff depth, being under 10 interceptions, completing a full season, passing yardage milestones, taking less than 15 sacks. Look, Bryce isn't a Ferrari, he isn't a Corvette, or a mid-level BMW. He's probably a new Toyota Sienna that will definitely get you somewhere and bring the whole team along with it, no fuss but not a lot of pizazz.  And really, it's about the destination, not about what drove you there.
×
×
  • Create New...