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!

     

Why no talk about trading up to #3 for Tua?


Real1zOnly

Recommended Posts

The Burrow talk was a pipedream but a trade up to #3 seems realistic. Detroit is not taking Tua and could be fielding calls for that pick. Miami is not going to trade a lot to only move up 1 spot in the draft. The only completion would be the LA Chargers. Seems like a great chance for Carolina to get their future franchise QB. Tua to me is the best QB in this draft. Nothing against Burrow great QB. But the way the NFL is heading towards these days you need a athletic mobile QB who can throw on the run. Tua has better upside than Burrow the traditional pocket QB.

 

What would it take to move up to #3 for Tua?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gave up hope that we could get it done when we found out cam can't pass a physical.   to not give up too much draft capital cam was going to have to be included in the deal.  he can't be so it costs too much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's as good as the guys next year, if we arent committed to Cam i'd be fine with it.  Gonna have to thread a needle to be in a spot to draft one of the guys next year or have a team willing to move out of the spot.  May as well strike when you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joeyxfresco said:

Trade up for a rookie QB who’s had more serious injuries than QB1? Nope. 

Pretty much sums it up for me. If you're considering moving on from Cam due to injury concerns then it doesn't make a lick of sense to trade up in the draft for a QB prospect with a significant injury history. Honestly, it doesn't make sense to take him at #7 if he's still there either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Most EVs are in the 90+ e-MPG meaning some measurement house somewhere compares the EV to a similar ICE model and works out how much is costs to charge (on average) versus fill up as a point of comparison. Talking long term, in the hundreds of thousands of miles?  No clue.  Some early signs are that EV batteries maintain 80% charge over 400k miles.  So there's that.   The challenge and charm of an ICE vehicle is being able to park it under a tree, get your jack stands out and tinker with your engine.  There's just not that same level of complexity in an EV.  I saw someone estimate there are 200 or so moving parts in an EV, and 2000 in an ICE vehicle.  I'm not a part counter so I can't really speak to that. I think that the EV is more the future than any type of combustion engine.  Those will still be around in specific purposes, but for most people - an EV will be the superior option in terms of efficiency.  I say that as someone who loves stupid horsepower numbers out of turbo 4 bangers and inline 6s...  I am one of those tinkers when I can be. A bigger issue for EVs is going to be the ownership versus lease.  Right now, there are INSANE leases on EVs, which is great, but what do you have at the end of that lease?  Nada, maybe some equity if you're lucky.  Where as I'm almost done paying for my car, and plan to keep it until the wheels fall off (or my son wrecks it when he starts to drive).  Will EV makers do the smartphone thing and build in planned obsolesce?  Stop updating software?  I love the tech in EVs, and I think getting more cars and trucks off the road is a good thing.  But I am still just a little concerned.  Capitalism has gotten far too extractive.  
    • Blacksheer's time was up when they drafted Etienne. 
×
×
  • Create New...