Main Menu

Recent posts

#21
Quote from: Jesse on Today at 12:26:19 AMIt's pretty rare to see any QB come up directly from college, much less one with his name recognition.



Rookie camp is for rookies, most likely QB's Thorne and Perkins will attend, maybe even Wilson. Elgersma would be wise to do the same if he wants to compete.
#22
Quote from: Blue In BC on Today at 02:35:20 AMWhen we cut Bridges we need another CB so Parker was moved from safety.

Yes Vaval as the spare for in game but a veteran DB is not a bad idea. Using Vaval as a CB doing double duty is a double risk issue. That and he's only played briefly as a CB.

It's another risk analysis since a veteran won't want to sit on the PR and we probably don't have one as a DI.

As you mentioned, most DB's age out quickly often due to a series of injuries and rising SMS.

I think we'd all like to find a rookie sensation CB but we haven't really done that for a few years. Moxey is a great addition but didn't come cheap.



They released Parker 12/23/25 well ahead of FA, that signifies a conscious decision to move on.
#23
Quote from: Blue In BC on Today at 12:17:05 AMLofton was injured in TC wasn't he? So Randolph may or may not have won the spot outright.

Maybe for a little while but he never got the RT job back, stats show he dressed for 1 game, that means most of his salary was carried on the 1 game IR.
#24
Quote from: Tecno on Today at 02:27:53 AMHe was so-so for most of the season and then pretty useless in the one playoff game.  I think guys who really blew the playoff got the burn-the-witches treatment.

Plus, I think Parker is ageing out (same for Houston).  DB is a very short-lived and ruthless and underpaid position.  Sucks to be a DB.

Plus Parker was slotted as a FS originally, then we soured on that idea.

Plus, we have Vaval as the spare, so quantity becomes less relevant than quality.

I do like that we gave Parker another chance after he healed up from bad injury.  Can't say we didn't try.


When we cut Bridges we needed another CB so Parker was moved from safety.

Yes Vaval as the spare for in game but a veteran DB is not a bad idea. Using Vaval as a CB doing double duty is a double risk issue. That and he's only played briefly as a CB.

It's another risk analysis since a veteran won't want to sit on the PR and we probably don't have one as a DI.

As you mentioned, most DB's age out quickly often due to a series of injuries and rising SMS.

I think we'd all like to find a rookie sensation CB but we haven't really done that for a few years. Moxey is a great addition but didn't come cheap.

#25
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 27, 2026, 07:02:27 PMFunny but they show no hesitation making those hard decisions before deleting D-linemen

DL is very much more "plug & play".  OL has to have gel, continuity, experience, time-in-system, etc.

Teams will shake up entire DLs every other season and if they get the right guys they'll be monsters week 1.  OL, not so much.
#26
Quote from: theaardvark on April 27, 2026, 07:43:10 PMI really don't want Vant or Rand as 3rd IMP oline.  They've had far to long to grab that spot, and haven't.

But they did... they were superb when starting at OG.  What they didn't grab was OT, because that's far harder and they simply aren't capable.

But I do posit that both Vant/Rand were better than Wallace at OG!  The only question is will the ratio and plan allow this.  If not, they are toast, or stuck on PR in reserve.
#27
Quote from: Blue In BC on April 27, 2026, 09:53:53 PMIf Parker left because of wanting more money, does this create an opportunity for him to return? If would we be interested? I'm not sure, we don't know the exact reason for allowing him to go to free agency.

He was so-so for most of the season and then pretty useless in the one playoff game.  I think guys who really blew the playoff got the burn-the-witches treatment.

Plus, I think Parker is ageing out (same for Houston).  DB is a very short-lived and ruthless and underpaid position.  Sucks to be a DB.

Plus Parker was slotted as a FS originally, then we soured on that idea.

Plus, we have Vaval as the spare, so quantity becomes less relevant than quality.

I do like that we gave Parker another chance after he healed up from bad injury.  Can't say we didn't try.
#28
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on April 27, 2026, 11:52:27 PMWhy not?  He's a rookie and probably has nothing better to do, the sooner he gets with the program the better.

It's pretty rare to see any QB come up directly from college, much less one with his name recognition.

#29
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on Today at 12:08:16 AMRandolph beat out Eric Lofton and Vanterpool for the RT job last season and started every game, but Broxton most likely owns that spot now.

Lofton was injured in TC wasn't he? So Randolph may or may not have won the spot outright.
#30
Quote from: theaardvark on April 27, 2026, 07:43:10 PMI really don't want Vant or Rand as 3rd IMP oline. They've had far to long to grab that spot, and haven't.

This is going to be a pivotal camp for the Oline, I'd love to get a guest coach in here... and you know who...

Randolph beat out Eric Lofton and Vanterpool for the RT job last season and started every game, but Broxton most likely owns that spot now.