top dawg

It was shocking. He had numbers similar to Goldilocks, and his accuracy was actually better I believe. He had the highest upside of any QB prospect in a while, and we passed on him like he was nothing.

I hope that he gets a chance. Honestly we never would've drafted him, or needed to, had we drafted Fields, but that's another story... The thing is though, there is a lesson with Fields: you should not jump the gun and draw definitive conclusions early about players because they all have talent; you just have to put them into the best situation to succeed (play to their strengths and all that jazz...).

Nah, just the regular Huddle hate biscuits and Haterade.

Well, you know, I'd think that all of us should be Corral cheerleaders, but what do I know...?

You do, that's why you're talking. This is supposed to be all in good fun, so just shut up. Don't take it there. You'll eat crow, or I will.

Like Robert Saleh, I'm taking receipts, motherfuger.

There certainly aren't any Cams or Lucks in the draft from what I've seen. No Burrows or Mahomeses either.

No, IDGAF if you don't think Corral is our future. He's getting better, and he will be in the mix regardless of rather you like it or not. For those taking a definitive stance on Corral based largely on Rhule's ineptitude, you will eat crow. You will eat crow. https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/football/news/panthers-matt-corral-recovery-making-progress/ Corral (foot) is no longer in a walking boot as he continues to recover from his September surgery, ESPN's David Newton reports. Corral will still miss the 2022 season, but his current progress from the Lisfranc injury he suffered during the preseason could set him up for a relatively healthy offseason. As someone the Panthers traded up to select in the third round of this year's draft, Corral represents a significant long-term piece for the franchise, which presently carries quarterbacks Baker Mayfield (ankle), Sam Darnold (ankle) and PJ Walker all on expiring contracts. Although a first-round quarterback selection is certainly a possibility next spring as the team sits with a [now 2-6] record at the moment, Corral at least offers an investment to carry over at the position.

More the new Robbie than the new Rhule, but it's not even that either. Anyway, if you actually read the responses, it's not really hate. Many are just explaining why we should have traded him, and use sound rationale to support that opinion. The "hate" that I've seen is for Fitterer (and by extension, Tepper) for not trading Burns.

fug Payton anyway. It was never going to happen due to the NFCS aspect. My thing is that Payton apparently thinks that he's supposed to go into a ready-made situation and profit off someone else's work. Dysfunctional teams would be hiring him to turn things around, maximize the talent and mold the team into a contender. If he doesn't want to do that, then he should stay in broadcasting.

They made this more complex than it had to be. He should have been traded because we aren't the right fit for him, so in that sense he is not worth what we're going to have to pay him. Now we could still get more immediate draft capital...hopefully...because he is still so young and hasn't hit his prime, but I surely wouldn't have bet on that. And, if they want to keep him (which would be ill-advised), we better have a coach in mind that prefers the 3-4 so that Burns can be all that he can be...as a pass rushing LB (ironically in the mold of the much cheaper Haason Reddick).

This is what people don't get. They're arguing about "young talent" [blah blah blah], but he has never been the right fit for a 4-3 (or a Snow 5-1 or whatever). He is a 3-4 LB playing out of position. Let me tell y'all a story: I was so peeved with Yahoo Fantasy Football for listing Burns as an LB. I wrote to them (tweeted at them and everything) a couple of seasons ago and argued that he should get a dual designation of "DE, LB" because though they listed him as an LB, the Panthers had him listed officially as a DE. They would not budge (though this year they have him listed as a DE). I thought about it, and just dropped him altogether, because he wasn't anywhere as consistent as top LBs, and he wasn't as consistent as top DEs either. Hell, even the top DTs outscore him (I have Quinnen Williams). Burns might be a sufficient BYE week replacement. The point is is that he's a tweener. He would be much more effective as a pass rushing, 3-4 LB. We aren't maximizing his effectiveness or potential because that's not our preferred system. This is the real reason why we should have traded him for that type of haul.

TMJ didn't make any sense. He was obviously more talented than Smith and has the upside of a one. Elf was at least playing decently for the most part. On the real though, neither one made sense. Rhule was an idiot. You can't leave more talented players in the dog house in the NFL because the difference in talent level is sometimes paper thin, and sometimes that's the difference between between winning and losing.

Well, he sucked. He's inconsistent (which is ultimately not what you want). But, did you forget his grade last week?

A "little thing like Mike McCarthy..." LOL (for real)

Star players are messing up their money too. We're talking possibly millions in their cases. Tape tells a lot, and I don't think that front offices are going to want to pay players that are half-assing out there simply because they're in a less than optimal situation. NFL types except players to be professional at all times, and even if they give you a pass and try to acquire you, they won't be paying you what you're worth.

Not really. It's been rumored for weeks that he was on the hot seat. Maybe it's a little surprising that his axing was mid season (not really), but there was a time that he and Rhule were in a race to be fired.

Like my late mother-in-law used to say, "What you don't see will make a whole 'nother world." The team is in flux. There are far too many unknowns to see any path right now, beginning with HC.

Moore is not really being paid like a superstar, but a star. And, at least at this point, we're not paying Burns like a superstar, but we may if we keep him. Be honest, they haven't played like superstars consistently enough to earn that label. But if you can acquire guys who can play around their level or better and pair them up with Burns and Moore, it should be enough to win. For the record, I've said that I would trade both for the right price. In my opinion, we got the right price for Burns, but Moore not so much. That being said, they're here, so we must figure out a way to get our money's worth.

Butker missed an easy field.

Trading Moore for a one was a nonstarter. He's arguably worth more than that now, especially with his relatively decent contract. The dead money wasn't worth just a first alone. If they had added a second, then yeah, but a first was basically nothing. Not trading Burns was ill-advised in my opinion (bordering on crazy). But, Burns is still young, and will still have high value once mid-March rolls around. Hell, he added a sack today. Like I said in another thread, if we add a more complete DE and a more complete WR, we'll maximize Burns' and Moore's effectiveness and productivity.

A first for DJ is not enough. A first and a second would've made me pull the trigger.

Was that Butker that missed the PA? OMG!

I can't take anyone seriously who totally disregards context. Persons who spew stats but just simply ignore context just aren't very analytical.

I don't think we'll pass that five-win standard. If "getting over the hump" is Tepper's bar, Wilks and company are toast.