Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

*IF* the Panthers release Jonathan Stewart....

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13

If the Panthers release Jonathan Stewart....

Hell yes. Bring him home and offer him a deal the day free agency begins.
10
29%
No thanks. Too many rushes and injuries on his soon to be 30 year old body.
18
51%
I like cake!
7
20%
 
Total votes : 35

  • The Panthers released Tolbert today, and a few rumors were circling on Twitter and national radio today that he might be asked to restructure or potentially get released as well. Im really not sure why they would want to release him, but they have done some odd things over the past few off seasons.
    "Practice without improvement is meaningless" - Chuck Knox
    User avatar
    Hawk_Nation
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2111
    Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:40 pm
    Location: South Seattle


  • Idk how this board feels about oft-injured players especially ones on the younger side of 30, I would say it's lukewarm.

    Stewart, imo, would have to come at the right price knowing he'll likely be a role player if Rawls and Prosise prove to be healthy. That role being short-yardage/goal-to-go bruiser.

    Question is whether or not, IF available, if he'll chase the most money or if he would possibly take a cheaper deal to play for his hometown team and help them get a Championship.

    The ladder would certainly be a great ending to his career.
    WE ALL WE GOT, WE ALL WE NEED!!!!!!!!!!!
    Pandion Haliaetus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3135
    Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm


  • Another oft injured RB? We have plenty of those on the roster....pass
    FIRE CABLE to SAVE RUSSELL!
    ludakrishna
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1328
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 9:40 am
    Location: Washington DC


  • An athlete's best ability is his availability.
    "Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!"
    User avatar
    Ace_Rimmer
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 620
    Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 7:59 am
    Location: Vancouver, BC


  • If they are 27 and over on any Free Agents that were starters your either paying big bucks or rolling the injury dice, add a big name and chances are they have had their wear and tear and a release is due to bang for the buck isn't there anymore or they would not be Free Agents.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 20896
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Hawk_Nation wrote:The Panthers released Tolbert today, and a few rumors were circling on Twitter and national radio today that he might be asked to restructure or potentially get released as well. Im really not sure why they would want to release him, but they have done some odd things over the past few off seasons.


    If they get Fournette I think he gets released. The only way he stays a Panther is a restructure I think.

    They have admittedly done some odd things from an outside perspective, but this wouldn't be one of them. His contract is the last of the previous GM's regime from nearly 5 years ago. As good as he's been, the age/injury history/production/cap hit in 2017 simply doesn't match. Releasing him is a free and total release from bad contracts.
    ctrcat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 791
    Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:50 am



  • I don't understand why people are wanting to address a position where we had injury problems by adding more players that have injury problems. This and the thread talking about us bringing in AP or Jamaal Charles just don't make any sense to me. I'm all for adding to the RB position but lets do it with someone that isn't already a proven injury risk every year. It's one thing if you're talking about signing a guy for the Vet minimum or with zero guaranteed money but guys like Stewart, AP, and even Charles, to an extent, will still get a decent amount of money. Thanks, but no thanks.
    User avatar
    DJrmb
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 853
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • DJrmb wrote:I don't understand why people are wanting to address a position where we had injury problems by adding more players that have injury problems. This and the thread talking about us bringing in AP or Jamaal Charles just don't make any sense to me. I'm all for adding to the RB position but lets do it with someone that isn't already a proven injury risk every year. It's one thing if you're talking about signing a guy for the Vet minimum or with zero guaranteed money but guys like Stewart, AP, and even Charles, to an extent, will still get a decent amount of money. Thanks, but no thanks.


    The draft. TONS of young, hungry talent this year. Stewart can call AARP for a job.
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 34838
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm


  • I would want Lacy over Stewart.

    Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk
    User avatar
    Sandpoint Hawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 401
    Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 4:36 pm


  • Ace_Rimmer wrote:An athlete's best ability is his availability.


    I'm an athlete and available.

    Image
    :lol:
    Adopt a rookie 2017-Delano Hall, S, Michigan

    Image
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2846
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


  • Sandpoint Hawk wrote:I would want Lacy over Stewart.

    Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk


    An injured Stewart is STILL better than Lacy.
    JumpmanXhawk
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 26
    Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 5:25 am


  • No thanks, we need to find a starting RB in the draft...not the surgical center.
    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions 2014.02.02 Seahawks 43 Broncos 8
    User avatar
    Cyrus12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4185
    Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:20 am
    Location: BC Canada


  • Don't have an issue with it in the least. If the market isn't too hot -- we could use either of those guys.

    This is a really good draft. Good for RBs too. But if you can band aid a RB group without using draft picks this year, you can really focus the remaining draft at other equally great prospect groups.

    It's never a binary decision. Clearly getting a healthy young bellcow back is empirically better. But it comes at a cost.

    Would I rather have a 1 year rental of Jonathan Stewart or AP or some other quality (if limited availability) back AND Kevin King/Baker/Melifonwu/Reddick?

    Or get some tier two back in this draft and sort through lesser options for DB/LB.

    Remember, UFA signings of these kinds of players is over well before April. So doing so also allows you some flexibility in day one of the draft. If we've painted ourselves into a 'have to draft a RB' corner at that time, then we're left unable to potentially move up if an OT slips to a manageable trade up range.

    So I'm not opposed to postponing our acquisition of a stud RB for a year. I'm not even opposed to doubling down and signing one of these guys AND maybe getting a tier 2 back on day 2 that we target as a 'guy we can't leave the draft without' or if that tier 2 guy we really like just unexpectedly keeps dropping in the draft. Which happens with multiple prospects in every draft. Any signing of these kinds of players only serves to grant us more options in the draft. And allows us to get greedy -- just like in 2012. Allow players we want to sit by the phone and maximize the returns.

    They don't have to be the ideal solution in order to be a good solution. Nor do they have to represent the final solution.
    User avatar
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1895
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


  • DJrmb wrote:I don't understand why people are wanting to address a position where we had injury problems by adding more players that have injury problems.


    Unless you want to spend a lot of money there's going to be a trade-off.

    To get a vet RB without an injury history you're going to have to trade in talent.

    For my money, the thinking is that the Seahawks don't need somebody to be a below average every down back, as their cupboard at the position isn't bare.

    With Rawls and Prosise they need someone who can be dynamic and part of that mix, and keep that mix going when one or two of the three of them go down with injury.

    There's of course some risk in three dynamic backs all with injury history, but for a team majorly in contention I think you're much better off rolling that set of dice than spending money on a guy like Rashad Jennings, who really isn't going to help you more than Alex Collins would if Rawls and Prosise go down.

    That's my thinking on it, at least.
    User avatar
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4052
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


  • Popeyejones wrote:
    DJrmb wrote:I don't understand why people are wanting to address a position where we had injury problems by adding more players that have injury problems.


    Unless you want to spend a lot of money there's going to be a trade-off.

    To get a vet RB without an injury history you're going to have to trade in talent.

    For my money, the thinking is that the Seahawks don't need somebody to be a below average every down back, as their cupboard at the position isn't bare.

    With Rawls and Prosise they need someone who can be dynamic and part of that mix, and keep that mix going when one or two of the three of them go down with injury.

    There's of course some risk in three dynamic backs all with injury history, but for a team majorly in contention I think you're much better off rolling that set of dice than spending money on a guy like Rashad Jennings, who really isn't going to help you more than Alex Collins would if Rawls and Prosise go down.

    That's my thinking on it, at least.


    Hmm, makes sense and I can see where you're coming from.

    Personally I don't want them to get a veteran RB at all. I'd much rather them grab a RB in a deep class coming into this years draft. I've also never been a fan of multi back systems though so that definitely plays into the way I think and I know others have different opinions. Personally I would prefer to have 2 feature backs (1 starter, and one to back him up) and 1 3rd down back. I also tend to prefer younger backs because of how short a RB's NFL lifespan is. They just wear out so fast my philosophy is to consistently bring in young backs.
    User avatar
    DJrmb
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 853
    Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:53 pm


  • ctrcat wrote:
    Hawk_Nation wrote:The Panthers released Tolbert today, and a few rumors were circling on Twitter and national radio today that he might be asked to restructure or potentially get released as well. Im really not sure why they would want to release him, but they have done some odd things over the past few off seasons.


    If they get Fournette I think he gets released. The only way he stays a Panther is a restructure I think.

    They have admittedly done some odd things from an outside perspective, but this wouldn't be one of them. His contract is the last of the previous GM's regime from nearly 5 years ago. As good as he's been, the age/injury history/production/cap hit in 2017 simply doesn't match. Releasing him is a free and total release from bad contracts.


    He restructured and extended through 2018 today. Gives cap relief and flexibility if Fournette is taken before 8 or if they go in a different direction. RB remains a relative need.
    ctrcat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 791
    Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:50 am


  • Do you think they would try to trade up for Fornette anyway? Just curious.
    R.I.P. Queen.
    User avatar
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6963
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:20 pm
    Location: A little ways from Boise.


  • Seahawkfan80 wrote:Do you think they would try to trade up for Fornette anyway? Just curious.


    In Madden yes
    Adopt a rookie 2017-Delano Hall, S, Michigan

    Image
    User avatar
    seahawkfreak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2846
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:36 pm
    Location: Aiken , SC


  • Seahawkfan80 wrote:Do you think they would try to trade up for Fornette anyway? Just curious.


    No chance. He's in play, but they might prefer Howard or one of the defensive lineman.
    ctrcat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 791
    Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:50 am


  • JumpmanXhawk wrote:An injured Stewart is STILL better than Lacy.

    Whoa, whoa, whoa; let's give Feast Mode a chance. :lol:
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 30475
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Bothell, WA




It is currently Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:09 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online