1. This Board Rocks has been moved to a new domain: CarolinaPanthersForum.com

    All member accounts remain the same.

    Most of the content is here, as well. Except that the Preps Forum has been split off to its own board at: http://www.prepsforum.com

    Welcome to the new Carolina Panthers Forum!

    Dismiss Notice

Tell me why again

Discussion in 'Carolina Panthers' started by PantherPaul, Oct 1, 2006.

  1. PantherPaul

    PantherPaul Nap Enthusiasts

    Posts:
    60,613
    Likes Received:
    2,843
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Close to the glow
    1. We kept 4 TEs
    2. and Eric Shelton only to have him inactive?
     
  2. Black&Blue

    Black&Blue NKW

    Age:
    80
    Posts:
    20,190
    Likes Received:
    6
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    1. I dunno

    2. because, if we do hit the injury bug again, we would still have a decent guy who can push the pile
     
  3. Collin

    Collin soap and water

    Age:
    48
    Posts:
    31,223
    Likes Received:
    451
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    1) Because we didn't keep Cramer, so we don't have a true backup FB. King can fill either role, and will come in handy next year when Seidman and possibly Gaines are gone.
     
  4. PantherPaul

    PantherPaul Nap Enthusiasts

    Posts:
    60,613
    Likes Received:
    2,843
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Close to the glow
    I am liking Gaines better over any of the rest of TEs we kept
     
  5. magnus

    magnus Chump-proof

    Posts:
    53,697
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    anywhere I lay my head I'm gonna call my home
    Four TEs because we felt we had more versatility there. Allowed us to keep both Goings and Shelton, which is something they felt compelled to do.

    Not everybody plays every week. Goings and Shelton weren't expected to get the ball a ton this year. That doesn't mean you keep just two RB or you dress a RB like Shelton just for shits/giggles.
     
  6. PantherPaul

    PantherPaul Nap Enthusiasts

    Posts:
    60,613
    Likes Received:
    2,843
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Close to the glow
    I just scratch my head with the 4 when we use a TE so little in the passing game. As good as Smith and Key are a tightend passing game would open things up that much more :twocents:
     
  7. Collin

    Collin soap and water

    Age:
    48
    Posts:
    31,223
    Likes Received:
    451
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Not really. When you have two good WRs, you don't need a pass catching TE. Think about it, the offenses with the best receiving TEs generally have crap receivers, or one good one at most.
     
  8. magnus

    magnus Chump-proof

    Posts:
    53,697
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    anywhere I lay my head I'm gonna call my home
    Tight ends aren't just receivers. We might get more attention from the position if we had one good TE, instead of seemingly starting and rotating each into different roles each week, and I'd prefer that, but as it is, our guys are roleplayers, they block from TE, from flanker, from FB, and they pass block a lot.

    They're useful, whether they're Gonzalez or not.
     
  9. PantherPaul

    PantherPaul Nap Enthusiasts

    Posts:
    60,613
    Likes Received:
    2,843
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Close to the glow
    True but wouldn't it be sweet to have the WRs go verticle and clear out the safeties only to have a TE go up against a linebacker?
     
  10. PantherPaul

    PantherPaul Nap Enthusiasts

    Posts:
    60,613
    Likes Received:
    2,843
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Close to the glow
    Yep we have a collection of players with different strengths. That and a Offensive coordinator that loves the run.
     

Share This Page