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!

     

Panthers are now the betting favorite for the #1 pick


Martin
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Navy_football said:

Or they pick 3 other positions of need and become a better TEAM this year. Then another good player next year.

But... they also pick a QB they didn't have to mortgage the rest of the TEAM for. Because they're such great coaches, they don't need the #1 pick to get a good QB that'll work for a really good team - see San Francisco. 

San Fran traded 3 firsts for Trey Lance 2 years ago and still made a nice playoff push this year.  If Lance was able to play in that last playoff game Purdy got injured, who knows what would have happened.  If nothing else San Fran shows up that trading up for a top 3 QB isn't as crippling to a franchise as people think.  Ask the pretty recent Super Bowl Winners the Eagles and the Rams.  

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Navy_football said:

No you drive a car that you didn't have to take out a second mortgage to buy. Might not be a Porsche but doesn't have to be a run down crappy car. 

So what is your QB solution. Not trying to be an ass here, just curious. Mine is to risk it a bit and trade up for Stroud.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Martin said:

So what is your QB solution. Not trying to be an ass here, just curious. Mine is to risk it a bit and trade up for Stroud.

I honestly wouldn't mind giving up a bit to get a good young QB. Just not too excited about giving up the haul needed to get to #1. There are good QBs that won't be picked by #9. If these coaches are as good as advertised, then shouldn't need to give up so much for competent play at the position. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

San Fran traded 3 firsts for Trey Lance 2 years ago and still made a nice playoff push this year.  If Lance was able to play in that last playoff game Purdy got injured, who knows what would have happened.  If nothing else San Fran shows up that trading up for a top 3 QB isn't as crippling to a franchise as people think.  Ask the pretty recent Super Bowl Winners the Eagles and the Rams.  

Good teams that were a QB away. That is not Carolina - yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Luciu5 said:

This is kind of a given. If the Colts are offering 3 firsts to move up 3 spots, it would probably take us about a bajillion picks to move up from 9. Most likely they can get at most 2 firsts from the Colts. From us, there are a lot of options. We could do 3 firsts and 1 second this year. Or 2 firsts and a haul of picks this year. The Bears need a lot of players, and I can see them passing on the very, very top tier talent for a load of picks. allowing them to do a 1 offseason overhaul.

For Colts to move up 3 spots would cost them (2) 1st round and (2) 3rd round not saying that is what would be offered, but trade value would need to be at least 3160, and for Panthers (us) to move up 8 spots would cost (2) 1st and (2) 2nds; not saying that is what should be offered, but trade value would need to be around 3280. Trade value for the #1 spot is 3000!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Wolfcop said:

Look at the records (at the time) of the teams who made those moves. 

Sir...

The Eagles didn't even win with the QB they went up to get. As a matter of fact, Wentz missed the entire playoffs. That team was stacked - especially their defense. 

The Rams went with a proven vet they knew could get them over the hump. That team was stacked - especially their defense.

The 49ers just went to the Super Bowl with Mr. Irrelevant. The very last player (not just QB) picked in the draft - as a rookie. That team was stacked - especially their defense. 

But the Panthers should give up a bunch of 1st and 2nd round picks to get a QB. Like no other positions matter.

Edited by Navy_football
hack spelled irrelevant.
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

The 49ers just went to the Super Bowl with Mr. Irrelevant. The very last player (not just QB) picked in the draft - as a rookie. That team was stacked - especially their defense.

They did? Last I heard they got blown out in the conference championship.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 2
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

    • We don't need to know what % was his fault last year because it was all bad enough to know to not sign up for more of it. Look at the stuff he was directly responsible for being the point man on, the pro-personnel, and the stuff he was involved in should tell you enough. If you have to discount it to make it look better than you already knew the answer. It's just making excuses for all of those people. Hoping something changes while discounting the work they already done here has proven to be a losing strategy every time so far. Maximus Copius Bulshitetus i think is the Latin name for that phenonium. 
    • 1) Signed 2 high profile guards to big contracts. Did we need guards? Yes. But there's a reason you draft guards and pay tackles. It's easier to find solid guards in the draft. Now we have the most expensive line in the league and still can't get 100 yards passing before halftime.  2) Traded up to get a RB when we didn't really need one. Chuba is one of the better RBs in the league right now and while it is a contract year, we had a crap ton of holes all over. Brooks was a luxury pick we didn't have the luxury to make. 3)Spending a small fortune to build a supporting cast for BY. Bryce didn't even put the work in himself during the offseason by his own admission. We didn't need to build an offense specifically for BY. We brought in DJ and drafted XL. These guys need a QB with a live arm. That's not BY. Speed kills but not when your QB can't legitimately make an accurate, deep ball strike without putting a ton of air under it and floating it.  4. Not looking for a true center. There were several available and it's been a position of need for years. We could have had our choice but we rolled with Corbitt, who did look good at the spot, but had an injury bug that struck again this year.  5) He didn't bring in any serious competition for Bryce. Now you can say that BY needs time to develop and we needed to show we had faith in him, blah blah blah. But the simple matter of fact is Bryce looked like a PS QB last year, Andy has one foot in the QB grave, and there was never an attempt to actually compete for the job. If he genuinely believed that BY was going to magically make it all come together watching YT and chillin for 4 months to unplug, then there's nothing else that needs to be said.  The goal of every GM should be to build a winning team. Players are commodities and loyalty leads you to an early walk out the door. We've tried to build a system to work around the most limited QB in NFL history. 60 years of history should have told him it was never going to work. And benching BY after 2 games is the real truth, he never should have been starting anyway. And either Dan should have known that as the great MLB that he was after watching BY's game tape, or someone else is making the call and Dan is just rubberstamping that decision.  Either way, doesn't matter. We're screwed because we've devoted 2 years of resources to build around a player that didn't put in the work in the off season after one of the worst NFL QB seasons ever. 
    • Something I find interesting is that you are more likely to find successful players as UDFA's than you are to find them with a single pick in any round past 3.  Those 3rd round compensatory choices?  Largely worthless.  Yes, I get it, there are a lot more UDFA's than there are drafted players in later rounds.  Basically, if you're fishing for starters you are simply not going to find anything in Rounds 4 - 7 with any regularity.
×
×
  • Create New...