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!

     

With our offense switching to 12 personnel...


Ja  Rhule

Recommended Posts

Would it make sense drafting Kelvin Benjamin and playing him as a tweener?  Our offense will be deadly... Most of the time he will draw coverage's by LBs and Safeties and both are mismatch. 

 

Chud ran 12 personnel with Olsen and Shockey.  Our basic formation this year will be:

 

WR1-TE-LT-LG-C-RG-RT-TE-WR2

--------------------QB

--------------------RB

 

Another option is to get a speedy WR in 1st and Troy Niklas in 2nd.

 

12 Personnel offense can also help a lot with bad LT and RT (our current issue).  

 

12 Personnel does not require to have a #1 WR because TE's will likely have more catches.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the feeling Gettleman will turnover every stone to find talent..  The obvious downside will be in blocking but if he can find a guy who can get separation in the passing game I think it should be welcomed with an open mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying we're switching anything is a massive assumption. Dickson could flat out be a back-up with 0 two TE sets.

 

Why assumption when Shula said we're switching?

 

PS: Dickson is a back-up... he sucked in Baltimore for the past 2 years and failed when he got a chance to shine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell Shula when we're switching or not.

 

 

 

Panthers OC Mike Shula plans to use more "12 personnel" formations this season, with two tight ends and one running back.

It's one way to help mask Carolina's wide receiver deficiency, as the "12" package only utilizes two wideouts. The Panthers signed Ed Dickson to complement Greg Olsen in the short term, but Dickson is a flawed player. We would not be surprised if Carolina targeted tight ends over wide receivers early in May's draft. Notre Dame TE Troy Niklas could be on their radar at No. 60 overall.

 

per rotoworld

 

 

Come on Rodeo... catch-up with the news...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only person scared of Benjamin in the 1st? He's got potential obviously, but I don't think he shows it next year. We need a player in the 1st who is coming in ready to perform. 

 

 

We still need a burner as our #1 WR

 

Speedy #1 will require double coverage with Safety over the top.  This means LB will have to cover TE... a mismatch and likely 1st down.

 

If they play nickle defense then you just pound the ball down the middle with Tolbert.  190lbs nickle trying to tackle 260lbs running back is still a mismatch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...