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


Recommended Posts

So much depends on interviews with the prospects. Tepper and Rhule seem like guys who put a lot of stock in what their guts tell them. If they think one of the prospects they get that gut feeling about fall to us, it's hard to sign Stafford who will likely want more than a 2 year contract. Tough choice, but knowing what I know now, I'm not signing him. That could change, but I'm more likely to take my chance on the draft.

Yes, we could do both, but again, I don't want to tie up a ton of money into Stafford without an OL in front of him.

Edited by Pup McBarky
  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My worry is that Stafford keeps the Panthers middle of the pack.  It is better to suck completely or be a contender.  Mid pack is purgatory.

Target Wilson and go get him or go all in on Watson.

Edited by Shocker
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pup McBarky said:

So much depends on interviews with the prospects. Tepper and Rhule seem like guys who put a lot of stock in what their guts tell them. If they think one of the prospects fall to us, it's hard to sign Stafford who will likely want more than a 2 year contract. Tough choice, but knowing what I know now, I'm not signing him. That could change, but I'm more likely to take my chance on the draft.

100% agreed. The interviews are HUGE. Especially for QB prospects 

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zod said:

He would instantly be the second best QB in Panthers history. 

 

I know that isn't saying much, but still. 

I mean if he is our only realistic option then I say give it a shot.  It keeps you from over drafting because of need.   I'm not advocating for or against him but I'm saying you shouldn't rule him out.  I still think they stay at 8 and take their chances.  

I will say that I think they take someone at 8 that will make the huddle melt down.

And it will be glorious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, t96 said:

He turns 33 in like 2 and a half weeks so he's even older than the number most here are operating off of... I really do like Stafford, but with his age and inconsistencies I just don't think he makes sense for this team right now at all. Much better than Teddy, but I don't think we're winning a SB with Stafford and then we still have the same problem once Stafford's gone. I much prefer a rookie or if the price is right Watson, but if we somehow got rid of Teddy and picked up Stafford without losing much to get him I'd be okay with the move. I really do want to see this team have a long term plan in place for the QB position. 

Well Jake was 29 when we signed him and we got plenty of usage out of him. Wasn't Beuerlein like 29/30 when we signed him and took over as starter at 32/33?

32/33 isn't really that old for a modern NFL QB. He could easily play 6-8 more years if he takes care of himself and wants to play that long. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

On the other hand, it is much easier to jettison those bad picks now than it was a little over a decade ago. Arizona was swiftly able to recover from their mistake on Josh Rosen. Washington cut bait from Dwayne Haskins. It hurts but at least you don't have a massive salary to jettison when you fug it up.

That's true.  It is pretty much cap neutral.  In fact, it even helps a little because you have one less likely starter on the roster every year from the first round misfires.

I just had an ugly thought.  Think of all the money Hurney saved us by missing everything after the first round all those years!  He probably saved us the salary of at least a half dozen starters through the years.

I need some bourbon in my coffee after that stray thought.

  • Pie 2
  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shocker said:

My worry is that Stafford keeps the Panthers middle of the pack.  It is better to suck completely or be a contender.  Mid pack is purgatory 

Define "middle of the pack."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of Stafford.  Obviously cost being equal give me Watson but the cost is so drastically different that Stafford is the sensible choice.  We can win with Stafford and still build and add to our team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kungfoodude said:

If we are in the middle, who the hell is below us?

Well we are technically slight worse so I guess there is only a handful.  It seems to change every season but unlike them we managed to stay middling.

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...