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!

     

Panthers trade proposal via ESPN


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Beerfacedlegend said:

And deshauns contract this team will sink ever more absolutely not I’m all for getting big names but I’m not giving up 3 first round picks for Watson . I’d give it up for mahomes or josh Allen but not Watson , he’ll I’d do that to trade up for Lawrence 

Dude it’s deshaun fricken Watson one of the best qbs in the game control yourself man 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we would draft a QB at 8, what's the harm in losing two future 1sts that are most likely between 17-25 in the draft? 

I feel like everyone sees the "three" FRPs and, rightfully so, has reservations. However, if one of those picks were to be used on Wilson/Fields/Lance anyway at #8, why not get an NFL top-5 QB just starting his prime at 25 and locked in for 4 more years. 

Yes, losing a first round pick in the next two drafts stings, but the tradeoff is pretty satisfying. 

I would prefer we keep all of our picks in '21, but would be fine if the compensation included a '22 2nd or 3rd. 

 

 

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

There hasn't been any trustworthy reports that this is the case or likely to become the case though. Most "trustworthy" rumors indicate that surprisingly the Jets are his preferred destination. There have been some whispers that he might be open to the idea of Carolina, but nothing that indicates he's ready to take a stand and try to force that move. Sounds to me like he's probably given the Texans an idea of the teams he'd like to go to or at least the teams he will refuse and he's at least somewhat open to multiple options. What could give us an advantage here is that we're an NFC team.

Also we're either coming though with some big offers or have a leaky front office if we're the "aggressive" team on the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, cookinbrak said:

Again I ask....Why doesn't Houston have a 1st or 2nd rd pick this year? Do we want to be in that boat? We'd have to ride our current Oline (or worse) for at least 2 years.

If we can keep the 39th overall, we can add an OT like Leatherwood or Eichenburg. We make Moton our focus in FA and lock him in. We now have bookend OTs for the next decade, a 25-yr old mobile top-5 QB, the NFL's top RB and a young, up and coming defense. 

Add an IOL in R3 and Watson would have a decent, young OL to grow with.

We still have holes (long-term C and WRs beyond '22, CB1, SAF, DT), but this is only year two of the Tepper/Rhule era. Watson/CMC/Moton/Moore are young enough to hold the fort down while we continue to add pieces. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cookinbrak said:

Again I ask....Why doesn't Houston have a 1st or 2nd rd pick this year? Do we want to be in that boat? We'd have to ride our current Oline (or worse) for at least 2 years.

Because Bill O’Brian thought Tunsil and Stills was worth 2 1sts and Andre Hopkins was only worth a 4th and a bloated RB contract. He is one of the few GMs I would take Hurney over. 

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

Definitely!  Not having to lose one of our best young players in Burns, CMC, or Brown and getting rid of Teddy would be a perfect scenario.  Losing the picks would suck, but like others said, secondary guys like Jamal Adams are being traded for 2 first round picks.  Trading 3 for a young, All-Pro caliber QB while still getting a 3rd rounder back is a no brainer.  Losing the second rounder would suck too, but 🤷🏻‍♂️ you gotta do what you gotta do.  After listening to what Rhule wants in his franchise QB, Watson fits the bill to a T

Edited by PandaMan
typo
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

    • It's honestly pretty interesting just seeing this pairing play out. Canales’ offenses (Seattle, Tampa) are run-first, under-center, play-action systems built around defined reads and intermediate/deep timing throws. That structure worked when he had QBs like Baker Mayfield or Russell Wilson in a system that created clear launch points and sightlines. His success has always been tied to a credible run game + play-action gravity. You can see that with the Panthers team building philosophy as well. Coker and TMac both are bigger receivers that won't get the best YAC production but thrive as possession receivers in contested scenarios. They're not the best in space and creating additional yardage in such, and would likely fair better systematically with a stronger armed QB who can create better opportunities on those boundary 1v1 matchups with stronger throws. Bryce, on the other hand, is a spread-native QB. His strengths are rhythm, spacing, quick processing, and off-script creation. Asking him to live in condensed formations with long-developing play-action concepts just hasn't been his forte. And well, his boundary throws are limited in velocity which takes a big chunk of the playbook off. And I mean a QB like Bryce can still work, it's just Dave's offensive philosophy and foundation is very much at odds with Young's physical limits and his own experience. So it's certainly still a learning experience for Dave to figure out how he can mesh his offensive philosophy with Young's strengths. He's very inexperienced with maximizing Bryce's strengths with his system. Would love to see us bring in an OC with spread experience and adaptability to implement a cohesive system with Dave to allow Bryce to thrive, as it's obvious we're sticking with him for a bit longer.   
    • Only thing I really agreed with is questioning why we didn’t take any timeouts on their last drive.  I know hindsight is 20/20, but I think it would’ve saved clock bc they were desperate to score as soon as the opportunity presented itself, but I also think it could’ve helped the defense regroup and maybe give us a better chance to stop them.
×
×
  • Create New...