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!

     

But, but, don't trade for Joe Thomas. He wouldn't of helped us.


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Kevin Greene said:

Who from this years top 3 Panther draft picks would you trade for a Joe Thomas who will be 33 this football season?

This. I would've loved to have picked up Thomas but given his age and what it would've taken to get him, not sure it'd be worth it. We went with a younger OT instead who can hopefully help us out for more than just a season or two. Cleveland wasn't going to just give him away, especially since they're planning on trying to break in a 2nd round rookie QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll never know what could have been worked out. His age would have likely been a main point in his valuation, but the possibility and yesterday's ponderings are hardly worth discussing now in my opinion. Our eggs are in the Kalil basket now and/or with some luck, Moton's. I'm at peace with that for now. If Thomas was ever even seriously in discussion, I'm at peace with passing on him, irrespective of Kalil and our draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not trade for Julio Jones too? Or we could've traded for Calvin Johnson in 2015. Why stop there when we can trade for JJ Watt? And Richard Sherman too. Hell, why not Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor to round out the big 3 back there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...