Watching Giants Off-Season Hard Knocks and Something is Crystallizing...

[Gapanthersfan]

Complete desperation moves and ‘I’m the smartest owner in the NFL… analytics, blah blah blah’ all while giving away valuable draft capital for scrubs.

football isn’t a plug a piece here type business. This is the people business. Culture. Getting the right people. Respect. It’s even more important than raw talent. I hope T has gotten that by now. 

[pantherclaw]

Hard to move Brian burns for multiple picks when there was nothing left of his original contract. That ship had sailed, and that's not Dan's fault. 

[strato]

Yes and people seemed to overlook that in April or whenever it all came to a head. 

[WhoKnows]

4 hours ago, Basbear said:

when they were 3-4(??I'm not sure of this), they were still considered a playoff team form past years. I believe Stafford was healthy during the trade deadline and nearly the week after got injured with the thought he'd miss a few weeks. Im not doing back to check the dates, but feel correct. I think you are confusing the CMC trade with some of this. Im sure I'm off some in my 'details" as well. 

Plus if you added BB to the rams, who knows what effect it would have on draft picks. You got to believe BB has a big positive difference with teams focused on 99. The picks should/would be be much worse than 36rd and better 1st than the Panthers...

The Rams also made a play for CMC when the 49ers did and yes, I am correct in terms of the records. SF was 3-3 when they got CMC and lost the first week he was on the team to be 3-4. They never lost again until the NFC Championship once CMC started and a week later Purdy started. The Rams lost to CMC/SF the first week CMC started to be 3-4 as well.

Stafford only started 9 games and was 3-6. While they were supposed to be better, they weren’t and after the Burns deal fell through they unraveled quickly as SF went on a 10 game regular season win streak. If it weren’t for a great draft, like Puca in the 5th and 2 8+ sack rookies, the Rams were an under .500 team in 2023 as well.

I agree with the whole 1) make that damn game changing trade, 2) if you don’t make the trade then he should have an extension already signed but 3) you are devaluing the pick values we were going to receive. For 3), the Rams were on the cusp of falling apart (Stafford was hurt in preseason and only played half the year) and our trade of CMC to SF was a dagger in their back and after that fallout and losing even more picks to us for Burns, the 2024/2025 Rams picks would have had more value IMHO than ours.

Doesn't matter anyway because we did everything wrong and became the worst team in the league in 2023 and maybe again the worst team in 2024, who knows.

[WhoKnows]

43 minutes ago, pantherclaw said:

Hard to move Brian burns for multiple picks when there was nothing left of his original contract. That ship had sailed, and that's not Dan's fault. 

Even though Dan did agree with not making the Rams trade, you are correct that he was in a bad spot in 2024. It wasn’t just no cheap year left. It was also the fact that Sweat and Chase Young were dealt for a 2nd and late 3rd (49ers) in the 2023 season. Those cemented the fact that we were crazy to turn down 2 1sts and a 2nd for Burns.

[toldozer]

We have the smartest linebacker to ever do it at our disposal and we hire the right hand man to literally the worst gm I've ever seen. The guy who couldn't even successfully run a restaurant.  If Dan turns it around great, but from everything I've seen and heard since he took over he doesn't bring any skill set to the table as a GM. Just says we need Dawgs over and over. Really hope I'm wrong.

[toldozer]

9 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

The Rams also made a play for CMC when the 49ers did and yes, I am correct in terms of the records. SF was 3-3 when they got CMC and lost the first week he was on the team to be 3-4. They never lost again until the NFC Championship once CMC started and a week later Purdy started. The Rams lost to CMC/SF the first week CMC started to be 3-4 as well.

Stafford only started 9 games and was 3-6. While they were supposed to be better, they weren’t and after the Burns deal fell through they unraveled quickly as SF went on a 10 game regular season win streak. If it weren’t for a great draft, like Puca in the 5th and 2 8+ sack rookies, the Rams were an under .500 team in 2023 as well.

I agree with the whole 1) make that damn game changing trade, 2) if you don’t make the trade then he should have an extension already signed but 3) you are devaluing the pick values we were going to receive. For 3), the Rams were on the cusp of falling apart (Stafford was hurt in preseason and only played half the year) and our trade of CMC to SF was a dagger in their back and after that fallout and losing even more picks to us for Burns, the 2024/2025 Rams picks would have had more value IMHO than ours.

Doesn't matter anyway because we did everything wrong and became the worst team in the league in 2023 and maybe again the worst team in 2024, who knows.

The worst part about the three potential trades for our best players was the 2 we traded in cmc and Moore was those guys were already under large contracts.  So not only did we trade them below their value but we also ended up with dead cap space from the deals. We could have traded burns for 0 cap hit for more then we got for our 2 best offensive players and like 30 million in dead cap.

[Waldo]

44 minutes ago, toldozer said:

We have the smartest linebacker to ever do it at our disposal and we hire the right hand man to literally the worst gm I've ever seen. The guy who couldn't even successfully run a restaurant.  If Dan turns it around great, but from everything I've seen and heard since he took over he doesn't bring any skill set to the table as a GM. Just says we need Dawgs over and over. Really hope I'm wrong.

It stinks to watch a player I loved turn into a front office failure. He is going to have clown paint on his picture at some point this season. You won't be wrong unfortunately. A dawg is what I want hitting people on the field but not running a team. Aggressive? Check. Smart? Nope. That's a typical dawg. 

"I think the biggest thing behind the trade up to No. 1 is, at the end of the day, we weren't going to settle for a quarterback that other teams didn't want," Morgan told The Observer in a phone conversation. "We were going to be able to choose who we wanted to take at No. 1. So I think, from that sense, we wanted to be aggressive, and choose the quarterback that we want to be the face of our franchise."

 

[PNW_PantherMan]

1 hour ago, Waldo said:

It stinks to watch a player I loved turn into a front office failure.

Most good players won’t make good GMs.  That’s just how it goes.  John Lynch is kind of the exception, and not the rule.

[Waldo]

43 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Most good playersMorgan's.  ake good GMs.  That’s just how it goes.  John Lynch is kind of the exception, and not the rule.

Lynch was also smart for a heavy hitter. Look at his first press conference and then compare it to Morgans.

 

[Joe Bear]

If we're giving Canales a year to learn in his new role, maybe do the same for Morgan. He can't rebuild every position before his first camp as a GM, so I'll be interested to see how he navigates everything this season and in the draft.

[Basbear]

18 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

The Rams also made a play for CMC when the 49ers did and yes, I am correct in terms of the records. SF was 3-3 when they got CMC and lost the first week he was on the team to be 3-4. They never lost again until the NFC Championship once CMC started and a week later Purdy started. The Rams lost to CMC/SF the first week CMC started to be 3-4 as well.

Stafford only started 9 games and was 3-6. While they were supposed to be better, they weren’t and after the Burns deal fell through they unraveled quickly as SF went on a 10 game regular season win streak. If it weren’t for a great draft, like Puca in the 5th and 2 8+ sack rookies, the Rams were an under .500 team in 2023 as well.

I agree with the whole 1) make that damn game changing trade, 2) if you don’t make the trade then he should have an extension already signed but 3) you are devaluing the pick values we were going to receive. For 3), the Rams were on the cusp of falling apart (Stafford was hurt in preseason and only played half the year) and our trade of CMC to SF was a dagger in their back and after that fallout and losing even more picks to us for Burns, the 2024/2025 Rams picks would have had more value IMHO than ours.

Doesn't matter anyway because we did everything wrong and became the worst team in the league in 2023 and maybe again the worst team in 2024, who knows.

I do remember some of the CMC and it was down to rams or 49ers. I think 49ers tossed in that future 5th and tipped the scale. Of course the Panthers picked the wrong team to fail.

I think rams also got in trouble for hiding Stafford's injury, was it a thumb deal?? It makes no sense to trade for CMC or BB if they thought Stafford was season ending IR'd. I think they believe it was manageable, but Stafford is too tough for his own good. 

You are right about that rams draft saving their team, best in the league that year even without a 1st. 

Im not reliable anymore about recent or past history, so I will take your time-line of events over mine. 

Yep the bottom line is now the new status quo, panthers did it the wrong way. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

5 hours ago, Joe Bear said:

If we're giving Canales a year to learn in his new role, maybe do the same for Morgan. He can't rebuild every position before his first camp as a GM, so I'll be interested to see how he navigates everything this season and in the draft.

Well doubly so if none of the draft choices contribute.

[frankw]

5 hours ago, Joe Bear said:

If we're giving Canales a year to learn in his new role, maybe do the same for Morgan. He can't rebuild every position before his first camp as a GM, so I'll be interested to see how he navigates everything this season and in the draft.

Canales is starting here fresh.

Morgan was intimately involved in some of the decisions that led to the trainwreck that got the previous GM fired. That cannot be ignored.

Morgan needs to hit on his draft picks big time. That is the only way he will be a success here.

All this talk about dawgs is falling on deaf ears because so far it's looking like the starters just want to be babied in camp.