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!

     

Yes we will have #1 in 2025


PantherChris
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, LegioX said:

Has anyone ever ended up drafted a QB #1 and 3 years later drafting another QB at #1?

The Cardinals drafted QB Josh Rosen first round of the 2018 draft prior to taking Kyle Murray @ #1 in the 2019 draft. 

Edited by Prowler2k18
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Khaki Lackey said:

Our front office might give up picks to trade down 

Our needs.  Like in a big big way.  Our needs going into 2025 look like this

 

WR

Corner

Edge rusher

and most importantly QB

and thats assuming Icky is working out

 

Man we are fuged for a couple of years so a trade back seems like the only option if a team wants to give us a kings ransome

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Our needs.  Like in a big big way.  Our needs going into 2025 look like this

 

WR

Corner

Edge rusher

and most importantly QB

and thats assuming Icky is working out

 

Man we are fuged for a couple of years so a trade back seems like the only option if a team wants to give us a kings ransome

Honestly, it's not that dier. A good QB hides a lot of issues. The Texans were looked at as having the worse roster ever, got Stroud, good again. The bears are stacked, but Caleb playing poorly. Suddenly they are lacking talent. All comes back to one player.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Daddy_Uncle said:

That's why a trade back isn't a bad idea

ALWAYS depends on what is offered and who is available - but definitely a maybe.  At least right now the 2nd rounder we got from the Rams looks like a great pickup since they have lost  both their Pro Bowl WR's temporarily.  And the 2025 crop of QB's ain't lookin too great...certainly not a clear cut top 5 pick at the moment.  Trade down for a monster haul, bridge with someone else, 2026-2029 we stockpile and dominate the 2030's!  Such a sad story considering it is 2024......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stingray3030 said:

ALWAYS depends on what is offered and who is available - but definitely a maybe.  At least right now the 2nd rounder we got from the Rams looks like a great pickup since they have lost  both their Pro Bowl WR's temporarily.  And the 2025 crop of QB's ain't lookin too great...certainly not a clear cut top 5 pick at the moment.  Trade down for a monster haul, bridge with someone else, 2026-2029 we stockpile and dominate the 2030's!  Such a sad story considering it is 2024......

There might no longer be a fan base if we have to wait till 2030.

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

    • Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...