Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Hurney and mortgaging the future...


  • Please log in to reply
165 replies to this topic

#91 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Administrators
  • 13,514 posts
  • LocationILM

Posted 25 November 2010 - 08:55 PM

*sigh*

#92 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,635 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 10:35 PM

Hurney said himself .......

you still haven't backed that up. you keep saying that "hurney said himself..." but you haven't shown where he did.

when you trade up to an earlier spot in the 2nd round , that 9 times out of 10 means that you are going to be giving up next years first.

last year he did it to get brown. this year he was trying to do it to get clausen. thats just how he works.

#93 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 10:43 PM

I really doubt he was trying to trade next year's 1st, because if he was, I think he actually finds a suitor.

#94 CarolinaCatBrigade

CarolinaCatBrigade

    She likes my Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 10:46 PM

you still haven't backed that up. you keep saying that "hurney said himself..." but you haven't shown where he did.

when you trade up to an earlier spot in the 2nd round , that 9 times out of 10 means that you are going to be giving up next years first.

last year he did it to get brown. this year he was trying to do it to get clausen. thats just how he works.


Yes he was looking to move up in the second. But the reason he didn't was because it cost him a 1st. Yes I can't find the old Observer article, but you haven't presented anything that backs up your claim ether. And you are right, 9 out of 10 times it does cost a 1st to move up in the 2nd round, that's why we didn't.

#95 CarolinaCatBrigade

CarolinaCatBrigade

    She likes my Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 10:55 PM

Here it is: http://blogs.charlot...nti-factor.html

"He called the St. Louis Rams, who had the first pick in Round 2, 33rd overall. But the Rams wouldn't make a deal, apparently because Hurney was not willing to surrender a future first-round pick for the third consecutive year.

Hurney tried to trade all through Round 2, but kept running into the same problem.

Alas, he sat there at 48 and got Clausen anyway, prompting him to say "Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make."

"Though he wouldn't deal his 2011 No. 1, he was ready and willing to swap his second-rounder next year and found a willing partner in New England. The Patriots love to collect future second rounders and, in exchange, gave Carolina their pick at No. 89, the 25th selection in the third round."


Check the facts next time.

#96 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,635 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:00 PM

that is what he has done in the past. were it up to him, he would have done it. that's how he does it. he has a track record of doing it. without facts to the contrary, it makes sense that he would have done it again. as long as he is the GM, htat is a danger. thats how he learned to do business. that's how his mentor did it.

i'm willing to admit i'm wrong about it, but without proof i won't.

doesn't matter, though. you have the pats that collect picks and you have the panthers that give them away. the goal is to get now and pay for it later. you always give up more later trying to get less now. you give up a first round so that you can move up in the 2nd. you give up 3 picks so you can get an additional first round now. you give up a 2nd rounder so you can get a third round project. when you do that, you put yourself in the hole. meanwhile the teams you trade those picks to can only thank you for giving them 2 for 1. that's why the pats have so many picks this year.

#97 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,635 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:01 PM

Here it is: http://blogs.charlot...nti-factor.html

"He called the St. Louis Rams, who had the first pick in Round 2, 33rd overall. But the Rams wouldn't make a deal, apparently because Hurney was not willing to surrender a future first-round pick for the third consecutive year.

Hurney tried to trade all through Round 2, but kept running into the same problem.

Alas, he sat there at 48 and got Clausen anyway, prompting him to say "Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make."

"Though he wouldn't deal his 2011 No. 1, he was ready and willing to swap his second-rounder next year and found a willing partner in New England. The Patriots love to collect future second rounders and, in exchange, gave Carolina their pick at No. 89, the 25th selection in the third round."


Check the facts next time.

meh...i was waiting for you to check them. want a cookie?

#98 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:01 PM

edit: ahh I see you didn't see it, nevermind!

why do you think Hurney was the sole reason for those picks? Don't you think a "Win-Now" mentality could have dominated them? It's very possible that we'll see a bit of a different strategy in the next draft or so.

too bad we already lost our 2nd rounder.

#99 CarolinaCatBrigade

CarolinaCatBrigade

    She likes my Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:02 PM

It definitely will hurt come April and we don't have the #33 overall pick.

#100 CarolinaCatBrigade

CarolinaCatBrigade

    She likes my Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:03 PM

meh...i was waiting for you to check them. want a cookie?


No. But I will settle for some pie. :D

#101 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,635 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:09 PM

pie and rep. that's as good as you're gonna get. satisfaction for proving me wrong about something would matter if that hadn't been done so many times....or if it bothered me.

anyway...you have to admit that he is prone to some very questionable gambles that the main benefactors are teams that i despise but keep on putting together incredible teams like the pats.

#102 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:11 PM

anyway...you have to admit that he is prone to some very questionable gambles that the main benefactors are teams that i despise but keep on putting together incredible teams like the pats.


true 'nuff. I think a lot of that is the urge to win now, so hopefully they can turn to building for the future now.

#103 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,498 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:25 PM

I like an SEC tested Ryan Mallett. That may be just me though.

It may indeed :sosp:

#104 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:28 PM

is this where someone says any SEC team could take the Panthers?

but seriously. I don't want Mallett, I just don't like what I've seen from him.

#105 Brooklyn Bully

Brooklyn Bully

    #1

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,539 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 11:30 PM

Cliff Notes: You put a good product on the field first, then you add some youth and ask them to cut their teeth. You don't throw kids out there and hope it all pans out.


The problem with building for the future is that if it doesn't work out, you could be screwed. Look at the history of the Panthers since Fox got here. We've really not been that good. In fact, this team has never been that great since the very start. The team we had last year? Simply average. But they decided to bring in rookies and pair them with that squad (actually less than the 09 squad). You should only "go young" when you can cover for a rookie's mistakes. We can't this year.

Just look at the Colts, Pats, and Steelers. They had a solid team...and brought up youngsters at the same time. When Bettis was the main guy in Pittsburgh, they groomed Willie Parker (busted). When Parker was the guy for a quick minute, Mendenhall was groomed. Hines Ward was the main man at WR, and they brought in Holmes (traded). Now Wallace is the star and Sanders is being groomed. In Indy, Harrison was the man as they groomed Wayne. Now Wayne is the man while Garcon and Collie get their reps. And the Pats always have a mix of young and old.

The key, though, is the QB for those three. If everyone here is confidant Clausen is top tier, more power to you, you're braver than I. I just have a problem with the risk our FO took. Instead of the above way of getting things done, they flatly admitted they were going young, not grooming young. I sure hope it works out. Because if we fall flat with nothing to back up the youth with, nothing will ever change here.

Edited by Uptown Bully, 25 November 2010 - 11:33 PM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com