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!

     

On Matt Stafford and the Carolina Panthers

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, AceBoogie said:

History tells you that you need to draft the guy. Stafford shouldn’t be in play at all. Watson would be an outlier 

I would amend that to say "recent history." There are lots of Super Bowl winning QB's that are on other teams than they were drafted by. Not as many in the last 15 years but there is also a certain QB who keeps skewing that number, as well.

Edited by kungfoodude
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raleigh PF Rising Star

Raleigh PF

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Even if we did keep both(and we absolutely wouldn't) we would be under $50 mil in 2021 and 2022. 

Remember, all the prorated bonus money for Stafford stays with the Lions. His actual pay would be $20 mil in 2021 and $23 mil in 2022. That's actually less than what we would be paying Teddy.

Okay, that's true, but there is no getting rid of Teddy now. His play last year and the size of his contract means he stays with the Panthers. So, while it's not $53M for the QB position, it's still near $40M, which is still too high if your QB1 isn't named Mahomes, Rodgers, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raleigh PF Rising Star

Raleigh PF

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

I want Watson, but not for three firsts. We don't have the draft capital to make a trade like that without it hurting us for years to come. We're not a QB away from being a complete team; not even close. 

If we can get Stafford for a reasonable price, I say do it. Rebuild the line through this draft, give them a year to gel with a proven QB under center and if we get to the playoffs, we package future picks together in the 2022 draft and go get Sam Howell or whoever is a good fit. 

Don't think of it as 3 first round picks - it's not.

Think of it this way. The Panthers would use their #8 pick this year on a franchise QB. So, instead of it being Lawrence, Fields, Wilson, etc, change that name to Deshaun Watson. So you've used one of those three picks on the QB. Essentially, the Panthers are giving up TWO future 1st round picks for Watson. 

Now, isn't that easier to swallow?

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I would amend that to say "recent history." There are lots of Super Bowl winning QB's that are on other teams than they were drafted by. Not as many in the last 15 years but there is also a certain QB who keeps skewing that number, as well.

Eh....I was going to respond.

Tannehill, Rivers, Brady, Brees, Smith...just this season.

Now, I do think that's an outlier due to the 3 HOF QB's that were still going strong this season...but yes, for long term success, you probably need to draft your guy.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfra78 Grand Master

jfra78

Posted
Posted

Of course I would rather have Watson, but Stafford is intriguing due to how little it may cost to get him.  We could probably flip Teddy and a third for him.  This would make it easier to contend sooner.  I like Stafford over Fields and Lance. I like Wilson,  but his injuries scare me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

He isn't a free agent, he is under contract for the next two seasons. He isn't going to have much of a choice in the hypothetical "Lions move on from Matt Stafford" scenario.

This isn't like the Watson situation.

I get that. I just dint think he fits what we are trying to do. Build long term winning sustainability. He is at the end of his career and we are entering year 2 of rebuild. I’m wanting to draft a young QB, but Watson being 25 and one of the best is obviously tempting. I just don’t think we should trade away any assets for another rental QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt Schultz Grand Master

Sgt Schultz

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

I want Watson, but not for three firsts. We don't have the draft capital to make a trade like that without it hurting us for years to come. We're not a QB away from being a complete team; not even close. 

If we can get Stafford for a reasonable price, I say do it. Rebuild the line through this draft, give them a year to gel with a proven QB under center and if we get to the playoffs, we package future picks together in the 2022 draft and go get Sam Howell or whoever is a good fit. 

Watson is intriguing because of his age (and his ability). He is essentially a first round choice that is proven, so low to no risk.  But, I am with you, if we are going to lose the ability for several years to secure starters to fill our other holes (four on the OL, maybe five, a MLB, some secondary help, a TE, and depending on what happens with Samuel, someone to fill that role), you risk becoming what we were under Rivera where our offense was a QB, maybe one receiver of some merit, and an OL that would have trouble protecting an Abrams tank (save for 2015).

I like Stafford, and believe he would be held in much higher regard if he had landed somewhere that the city did not throw a parade if they simply made the playoffs.  But he has neither the age nor dramatic ability advantage of Watson.  He does not fit in with the "younger, better, longer" philosophy.  He would just extend the QB envelop a bit before we need "the guy."  As ForJimmy said, he is basically a rental whereas Watson is (or better be) the solution. 

Still, at the right price, he might be in play.  Our current QB depth chart should not contain the word "depth."  Stafford may give us the flexibility to not draft a QB in with our first pick (especially if 3 or all of the top 4 are gone), or trade down to fill other holes and pick somebody like Jones, who may or may not become a starter but at least makes your depth chart more than one layer deep.  It really depends on what Rhule and company think about the "big 4" not named Lawrence, and what they think of the available QBs not in the "big 4."

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • electro's horse
      David Newton finally retires

      By electro's horse · Posted

    • jasonluckydog
      David Newton finally retires

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      He is a great guy but a horrible reporter. He makes my skin crawl when I hear his name. I heard that babies cry and dogs attack him when he enters a room. Other than that he is a good dude. Now go burn in hades u sum bit. 
    • electro's horse
      David Newton finally retires

      By electro's horse · Posted

      The job just really passed him by. He came up when basically you just needed to get three or four quotes, toss a couple of team provided stats in there, and stretch it out to column length. you got your copy in by 330, out the door by 4, then chill/shmooze the rest of the day. If you were really good you got a book deal. Every now and then you got to write an editorial. The goal of the profession was like Peter King where ostensibly you’re a beat writer for whomever but you get paid to just shoot the poo. now it’s a 24 hour job, you’ve gotta be social media savvy, the pace has increased substantially, you’re expected to produce more than ever, you gotta be able to look through bullshit etc. there’s still risk of industry capture where you just become a mouth piece. Sheena Quick is obviously shameless. I don’t think Newton ever aspired to be more than an inoffensive beat writer, but even that relatively simple role was just more than he was cut out for. its even worse when you’re covering a team that expects the Fourth Estate to act as a PR extension, or considers them on par with buying Twitter bots to promote Bryce. there were over thirty papers that covered the panthers first training camp. In that environment there’s room for boring guys like newton, and they may even be incentivized to push the boundary a little. But today that just isn’t the case and most of the guys are hanging on until retirement (person, gantt) or they’re good and gonna be matched up like Jordan. im not defending the current state of sports journalism, just saying that what counts as a meat and potatoes beat writer passed newton by. He’s retiring well past his sell by date, but that’s pretty common for his generation in general. 
×
×
  • Create New...