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!

     

No more Watson threads. Use this one or one of the other 20 existing ones.


rayzor
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Shocker said:

Of course not.  Stop.  Moving up to #1 from like 5 doesn’t cost 3 first, 2 2nds and Burns and Chinn.  Wake up

I acknowledged the player cost. But in terms of picks? It would cost a ton to move from 1 from 5, assuming the 1st overall team even wants to trade down. And if there's a #1 overall worthy QB, there's a good chance they aren't moving. But let's play along and assume they would. I just cited the 49ers package to move from 12 to 3. The value difference on the trade value chart from 12 to 3 is 1300 points. The gap from 12 to 3 is 1000 points. It would take the 5th overall plus two future firsts plus likely a second or third round pick to move up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Restructure, resign, extend whatever BS moves they need to do to make it work for the salary cap. The Saints have been doing it for a decade now. 

I already posted an article from the Saints fansided on what they would need to do. It invovled them moving on from key pieces of talent on their roster. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Smittymoose said:

I acknowledged the player cost. But in terms of picks? It would cost a ton to move from 1 from 5, assuming the 1st overall team even wants to trade down. And if there's a #1 overall worthy QB, there's a good chance they aren't moving. But let's play along and assume they would. I just cited the 49ers package to move from 12 to 3. The value difference on the trade value chart from 12 to 3 is 1300 points. The gap from 12 to 3 is 1000 points. It would take the 5th overall plus two future firsts plus likely a second or third round pick to move up. 

Waiting on QB this year could put us at #1 and cost nothing extra pick wise.  It is all hypotheticals at this point

Edited by Shocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

The saints would have to trade away players from that defense to make the deal happen, also they would need to cut roby and jenkins. They have to replace 2 olineman starts from last year, and MT will not be in the deal to the Texans, bc the Texans dont want that expensive headache.

I dont think Watson would be coming to last year's saints team. He would be joining a gutted Saints team, with zero space next year as of this moment. 

I still see the Saints as the leader in the clubhouse.  Too many offensive weapons that Watson would like to work with.   But the Saints would definitely have to take some lumps to make the deal happen.  Probably most of these on defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be a Panthers fan until the team doesn't exist or is moved elsewhere.  We could blow up the whole team and be hopeless and the Panthers would still be my team.  Just the way it is for me.  That's more of an emotional attachment than anything.  I've moved all around the country since growing up in Charlotte and I simply cannot stop being a Panthers fan  (for better or worse).

But on the Watson/Tepper dynamic.  In the professional world, anyone who's burned a bridge like that with their previous employer has huge red flags.  They could be coming from a terrible situation, but it's still something to watch closely.  Was Houston 100% in the wrong and Watson would love spending the rest of his career in Carolina?  Maybe.  But to me the risk is certainly there that after 3-5 years of BS in Carolina he wants out again.  Combine that with a FO/Ownership that has soured on 2 QBs in 2 years.  It's not a great look.

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Icky is having a great year and played better at LT than Christensen. Mayes at C over Christensen is the headscratcher to me.
    • I think cats are probably going to be the most dangerous predator because that's how they survive.  That's why they evolved the way they did. Bears though are HUGE with sharp claws, thick fur and skin, and can develop terrible cocaine additions (sorry, but that movie is so much fun, well half of it).   In a 1v1, with animals who are set up and provoked into combat, it's going to be challenging.  The cats will fight until they realize they can't win and try to escape.  While they can be fierce, they also have a high survival instinct.  You don't see them downing healthy bull elephants.  Bear are very fierce, but they are energy conscious.  If there's plenty of food around, like when the weather is warm, they will be relentless.  When it's leaner, they will be smart. So...I guess it depends?  Right now, I'd put money on the bears over the cats.  Cats are devastating, but also smart.   Also, what kind of bears are we talking about?  Polar Bears?  Grizzly?  Black?  Panda?  kind of a range lol.
    • Anyone else not happy with this decision? I like what we have going with Christensen. Not sure I would disrupt that. JMO
×
×
  • Create New...