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!

     

Gantt weighs in on Deshaun Watson and Matt Stafford


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Scott12345 said:

I say Stafford going to Indy...they have a good GM, bet he cuts a deal

I think it's the Pats, Colts, or Niners. One of those three teams will do it. Teams that are positioned to compete now and need an upgrade at QB and in SF's situation, a QB who can stay on the field. I'd put the Bears in the mix too but I'd be shocked if the Lions traded him within the division. The Niners will likely have to significantly outbid the Pats and/or Colts to get the Lions to trade him within the conference but that's still a whole heap better than within the division.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BurnNChinn said:

Cam was finished at 30 and is finished now if you don’t see that than maybe you need to quit watching football lol.

Yet Cam accounted for roughly the same amount of TDs per game as Stafford did last year with significantly less around him. But yea context doesn’t matter. 

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

1 hour ago, rippadonn said:

Check one of the previous 80 Watson threads. Insider said someone close to Watson said Carolina was the sleeper and he'd love to come "home"(close to Clemson).

 

Sorry if you believe insiders right now, he never said that. He will stay with Texans when they hire EB and all these threads will go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

I think it's the Pats, Colts, or Niners. One of those three teams will do it. Teams that are positioned to compete now and need an upgrade at QB and in SF's situation, a QB who can stay on the field. I'd put the Bears in the mix too but I'd be shocked if the Lions traded him within the division. The Niners will likely have to significantly outbid the Pats and/or Colts to get the Lions to trade him within the conference but that's still a whole heap better than within the division.

Funny to think of the Lions GM trading Stafford to his prior team's division rival.

Could happen, though. and he'd be very well suited to run Shanahan's offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AceBoogie said:

Yet Cam accounted for roughly the same amount of TDs per game as Stafford did last year with significantly less around him. But yea context doesn’t matter. 

Cam has 2600 yds passing and 8 tds. Stafford had over 4K with 29 tds. Don’t give me rushing tds that came from like the 1 yd line 90 pct of the time. Cam CaNt ThRoW and is one dimensional. Stafford has almost eight seasons with over 4K and one with 5k. Sorry Cam only did it three. Maybe you should look into to stats before talking!

  • Beer 1
  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, SOJA said:

I'm sorry but while I mean no disrespect to Stafford (who is underrated and really has been a warrior for a terrible Lions franchise) he is not in the same stratosphere as Watson even disregarding their age. 

This seems like pretty obvious exaggeration given how closely their production and situations compare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People actually think Stat Padford is a franchise QB lol.
 

Every time he plays a playoff team he ends up playing terrible that why his record is like 10-65 (or something outrages like that) against teams with record over .500

 

He’s Matt Ryan with a stronger arm 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don’t get the Stafford hate. It’s bizarre considering our two best QBs in franchise history are Jake Delhomme and Cam Newton and neither is even close statistically to what Stafford is (Which is not a knock towards Cam). 
 

He’s 4th among active QBs in game winning drives. Behind Brady, Brees and Roethlisberger despite him only playing 13 games in his first two seasons. He’s had no one to throw to other than Calvin Johnson and Golden Tate yet he consistently throws for 4000+ yards. Since 2011 he’s only missed 8 games and has played through numerous injuries because of a consistently bad OL. Not to mention he played under Jim Schwartz and Matt Patricia. Two poo coaches. 
 

Now considering the Colts, Patriots, Saints, Broncos, Bears and WFT could all make a play for him, I’d worry it would take quite a bit to get him. But if a couple 2nd round picks gets it done, I’d be very happy seeing him come here. We could patiently draft and develop his successor whenever we wanted. 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JJman Returns said:

I just don’t get the Stafford hate. It’s bizarre considering our two best QBs in franchise history are Jake Delhomme and Cam Newton and neither is even close statistically to what Stafford is (Which is not a knock towards Cam). 
 

He’s 4th among active QBs in game winning drives. Behind Brady, Brees and Roethlisberger despite him only playing 13 games in his first two seasons. He’s had no one to throw to other than Calvin Johnson and Golden Tate yet he consistently throws for 4000+ yards. Since 2011 he’s only missed 8 games and has played through numerous injuries because of a consistently bad OL. Not to mention he played under Jim Schwartz and Matt Patricia. Two poo coaches. 
 

Now considering the Colts, Patriots, Saints, Broncos, Bears and WFT could all make a play for him, I’d worry it would take quite a bit to get him. But if a couple 2nd round picks gets it done, I’d be very happy seeing him come here. We could patiently draft and develop his successor whenever we wanted. 

You sound like all those Pats fans talking up Cam and what he did in the past.

There is a reason the lions parted ways with him. 

Giving up draft picks for him would be a terrible decision. 

  • Poo 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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...