BrisbanePanther

But what was their record against Carolina those years?

I'm actually surprised that anyone has an issue with this. If I'm watching a sport whose underlying message is, "my guy is bigger, meaner, and stronger than your guy" then I think this call is totally fine. And injuries already happen with big pileups as well. I don't see anything about this play that increases risks that they already have on the field. I'm probably on an island with that one though.

I watched the Tepper video. He made his money on distressed assets. No way he allows #9 to go for Fields, who is now a distressed asset just because of these rumours. Poles is also letting the price get lower (and showing his greenness--he's no vet GM either) by not snuffing this talk out. Even if Fields isn't traded, they've probably set themselves up for an acrimonious Lamar situation anyway. They may actually have to trade him a la Matt Ryan in the Watson mess. The only way Fields wears a Panther uniform now is probably for a day 2 or 3 pick.

Brilliant. You could even move the year ahead and swap Stroud for Williams and Young for Maye or vice versa and it'll be just the same.

The collective head coaching experience in staff is amazing, but what gets me is the total time spent in Super Bowls. There's probably at least a half-season's worth of games that this staff has spent in Super Bowls alone, and multiple seasons worth of playoff games!

I think even if it all fails now, we have to give Tepper a pass in that instance. He has stated that he's learned. The guy seems to take pride in the ability to brag about his wins in business. To think he would suffer a long-term losing football team--his biggest investment by far--is not realistic. The Panthers failing would outshine anything else he's ever done or will ever do in his career. A bunch of rich people have properties and yachts, but only 31 principally control some of the most valuable enterprises in sports and even fewer fully own it by themselves. And we've heard the "let the football people do their job" a lot. I could understand him not doing so in the Rhule regime--nor should he have. OTOH, I completely understand him turning the team over fully to this regime and fully expect him to.

I think you may be right on a third...maybe a second if a team is has a huge hole and thinks he's good value for money (i.e. to extend him is eight figures over five years rather than nine figures).

If that's the case then trade Brown. Either way, Chicago was like one of those dog doors on D this year. Carolina can send someone on D (even Shaq) as part of a package and Chicago will be better than they were this year. They need proven players more than they need additional picks. Someone from Carolina's D stops them from bidding against themselves as much during free agency.

Agreed, but that doesn't stop people (not just Huddlers in this case) from saying, "See, you don't need to 'waste' a FRP on a QB." Bonkers and I'm not sure why the gun-shyness over a 1st round QB who may not pan out doesn't exist for the corner, who also may not pan out (starting to look at Horn...the best ability is availability after all).

Same could be said for QBs, which is why Huddlers are drawn to the Dollar General rounds for the most important position in the sport. People think they can cheat code a 3rd rounder or lower because of the likes of Jake, GOAT, and maybe (maybe) Purdy. Also not Madden.

Now THAT is a great (and probably underrated) movie. "I aim to beat you and drink your blood from a boot." Knocking on person out with the other person's head was also...creative.

??? Is this writer NY based? Why would Carolina go all the way to 3 for Richardson and not stay a 9 for him (or go to 6 for Bryce themselves)?

My point exactly.

Truth is that there's no such thing as a good QB draft until years after it's happened. People always put the next draft as the good one rather than the current one. Besides, relying on a "good" QB draft seems like code for, "which one gives me the best chance to have an all-pro talent fall to me at pick 12 once I've gone 7-10 for the 8th straight year?" If you're sitting at #1 or #2, a "good" or "bad" QB draft doesn't exist because you don't care about who falls where.

The "None of the QBs I wanted fell to me so now Corral can prove it" draft...trade downs to have assets to either go get Maye/Williams in '24 if Corral doesn't prove it, really load up on weapons in '24 if he does, and/or keep extracting future 1sts with our 4(!) firsts in '24.

I see him as a Kirk Cousins clone...so I guess the question is if the two were swapped, are people feeling the same?

I think 9 + 39 + Burns gets it done. The Bears need players. If we sent 3 #1's instead, I wouldn't be surprised if they used them to acquire a player anyway.

I might be confused but that looks like using 2 1sts in '23 and '24 to get a QB anyway? I've seen others say to draft AR and sit him until next year...but does that mean that he's better than Maye/Williams? Otherwise, if he's not playing until next year, why not draft one of Maye/Williams next year, who you'd probably start. All three guys are first year starters in this scenario. So maybe just use the '24 1st to go get the QB you want this year instead of hoping he falls, or use this year's first on BPA (or trade down) and use next year's 1st on a QB.

Thanks--yes, that's what I meant. Probably should've clarified next year (rather than next draft).

And guess what--they're basically drafting back to normal next year. Arguably didn't miss the picks at all.

But not wrong. After nearly three decades of watching this team and reading this forum since its beginning, it would be silly to believe otherwise.

In another thread, someone posted that we've had SEVEN winning seasons in 28 years. If this us winning mentality, I'd hate to see what a losing one is like.

This has been an entertaining back and forth. For the record, I'd trade Burns in a flash if it guaranteed my choice of QB and reduced the price of future picks. Yes, he's a 24 y.o. pass rusher with all sorts of value today. Then, before the ink is dry on his extension this forum will see him as a 25/26 y.o. millstone on the cap and therefore the team's future. He'll then be traded for a 5th rounder and this same forum will say good riddance...all while still debating on whether Arch Manning is worth trading up for in the draft because we still somehow have too many holes (again). Or worse, he has a mediocre season next year, Tepper then balks at his asking price and Chicago pays him what he wants with all their cap room Peppers style. Then he leaves and Carolina has nothing to show for it other than an expanded search for a new DE and QB.

All the more reason why (sorry to keep going back to this) we consider trading Burns--who will also need to paid--who they'd probably rather have than a rookie or other FAs. It would hurt to lose him, but we have a much better track record of securing disruptive defenders than QBs. We know he's worth 2 #1s. Send him and the 2024 #1, plus maybe a couple 2nds.