Rapoport: Panthers expected to be in the mix for Watson.

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

And that strategy has rarely ever worked.  We will see what the Bucs look like next season once they get bounced from the playoffs.  

Packers live off of free agency/trades... Chiefs too... Bills as well. It's not a Bucs strategy. Even though they are the topic right now.

[WarPanthers89]

3 minutes ago, hepcat said:

The amount he has played through college and his pro career is really high. He probably has as many touches as another RB who is 30. Not saying CMC isn’t still a great player but he will never achieve the numbers he put up in 2019 again. He wouldn’t stay healthy for another season with that kind of usage, few players would. History has shown us that time and a lot of touches aren’t kind of RBs. If there’s a chance to trade him for Watson, I do it without hesitation. 

I know that’s what you would do but it’s not reality. I can see the opposite opinion on a lot of things, and I agree that RBs don’t have as long of a shelf like as other positions, but it is crazy to have that argument at this point in CMCs career. He’s not even close to the age of breaking down..... he’s 24 years old. He had one season this year where he has been injured but has improved every year he has been in the league. Next year he will be a top 1-3 back yet again and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. If he were to switch to a slot WR later in his career he would be one of the best in the league in that role also. 

[LinvilleGorge]

If we can get him without absolutely crippling our roster and/or ability to build a roster, it's an absolutely no brainier. He's a 25 year old proven MVP caliber QB. The opportunity to add a guy like that to your roster almost never occurs in the NFL. 

[t96]

1 hour ago, jfra78 said:

I have a feeling CMC would be included in the deal

McC, #8 overall and 1st rounder next year could do it. Would be worth it for us.

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, t96 said:

McC, #8 overall and 1st rounder next year could do it. Would be worth it for us.

Without hesitation.

[45catfan]

Panthers DO NOT Have the Ammunition to Pull Off a Watson Deal

[Jon Snow]

8 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Packers live off of free agency/trades... Chiefs too... Bills as well. It's not a Bucs strategy. Even though they are the topic right now.

The Packers, Chiefs and Bills can afford to because they drafted their franchise QB's, duh.

Edited January 18, 2021 by Jon Snow

[TheCasillas]

Just now, Jon Snow said:

The Packers can afford to because they drafted their last two franchise QB's, duh.

Wouldnt we if we got Watson? Aaron Rodgers has the same impact on the pack cap, as watson would here.

[bigdog10]

I’d give up three firsts and not even blink. 

[Growl]

15 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Who said use 1st round picks on depth?  I get that you guys are star struck over Watson but the reality is he alone cannot do it all.  You need a complete team and brother this team is not complete, not even close.

there are no complete teams

[Jon Snow]

1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

Wouldnt we if we got Watson? Aaron Rodgers has the same impact on the pack cap, as watson would here.

They drafted him.  They didn't trade the farm for him when they were rebuilding.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Panthers DO NOT Have the Ammunition to Pull Off a Watson Deal

He's assuming the Texans would trade Watson within the AFC. He's also overlooking a lot of quality pieces we have. CMC, Burns, Chinn, and Moore would all be valuable trade pieces. 

[bigdog10]

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Panthers DO NOT Have the Ammunition to Pull Off a Watson Deal

This article assumes the Texans would trade their franchise qb within their conference for their own pick back. 
 

The optics of that alone makes me think they’d be hesitant to trade him in conference. 

[Jon Snow]

Just now, Growl said:

there are no complete teams

No, but you have get as much talent everywhere on the team that you can.  It's a constant churn to keep a team competitive.  

Agree to disagree.