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!

     

David Newton questions McCaffrey's support of Bridgewater


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, there are two takes you can have after watching what his response is to the coach/GM not committing to Teddy and other QB talk.

1.  CMC gave a textbook non answer and stayed away from the question. 

OR

2.  if you read his eyes and what he was saying with them in regards to Teddy... 

See the source image

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

16 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Newton's suggestion here is that McCaffrey was more supportive in prior comments made around the end of the season.

I'm looking for what comments he might have referenced but so far haven't found anything.

Yeah but you expect him to be more supportive at that moment in time. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teddy was a backup in New Orleans. That's what he was. No longer a starting QB at that time and couldn't solidify the starting spot from old man Brees and was soon known NOT to be the future of the franchise in New Orleans.

Sound familiar? Not Teddy's fault. I'd give it a go for the check he got. Old friends getting a guy paid.

Edited by rippadonn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah but you expect him to be more supportive at that moment in time. 

Given.

As to those actual comments, the only thing I've been able to find on it is an end of season interview on the team site that keeps resetting itself when I try to watch it, so no idea on the context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Given.

As to those actual comments, the only thing I've been able to find on it is an end of season interview on the team site that keeps resetting itself when I try to watch it, so no idea on the context.

It is a nothing burger, IMO. 

He probably knows that we are trying to move on just as much as anyone, no reason to add fuel to that fire. He did the right thing which was juke around that question. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

It is a nothing burger, IMO. 

He probably knows that we are trying to move on just as much as anyone, no reason to add fuel to that fire. He did the right thing which was juke around that question. 

Yeah, it's basically a "no comment" (which is wise).

As far as the larger context of prior comments, maybe that's valid but I'm not gonna put a load of effort beyond a basic internet search into finding it.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a stupid question---you do not ask a player about a player who is under contract on another team. She prefaced the question with a statement about the Panthers' interest in Watson, so anything he says after is framed around that situation---A pro Teddy answer suggests no interest; a negative answer suggests interest...It was a trap or a question that reeks of dumbassery.   How in the hell does ESPN allow that in their reporters?  If CMC takes the bait and starts talking about Watson, there are possible fines and sanctions. Come on.

Edited by MHS831
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

    • Not sure who said it first, but Tepper is the correct answer. Still, I'm gonna go with Kasay keeping it inbounds. If, you subscribe to the butterfly effect version of time travel consequences.... When we win SBXXXVIII everybody's lives change: Moose never breaks his leg, We win it all again in 05. Tommy Jone is unknown and Peppers stays home, Champs once more 2008. No artificial pig heart turning JR into a creepy weirdo, no lockout, no Clausen. Fox and Jake ride off into the sunset on their own terms. No 2-14, no #1 pick. But, no laptop, no Blinn, 3 years behind The Golden Calf of Bristol, we still get Cam. JR let's him grow his locs like he always wanted, Smitty sees Cam in a new light. Dreads swinging, (and Smitty with his 3 Lombardis behind him) Cam is old enough to get those calls. No Manning narrative, Cotchery TD, PI against Talib on Philly Brown, 10,000 RTP calls and Kony Ealy SB50 MVP. No Jeans Fridays, no Tepper. KB doesn't slip on his own meatsweat mid-route in SD, Cam becomes the 1st QB to win 10 straight SBs. Retiring after being elected 47th president of the US of A, Cam ushers in the Permanent Proletarian Revolution across the globe, Xi Jinping bows in awe. "ẄøŘƙƐṛ§ őF ŧĤə ŵØRłð, ŮŊÏŦƐ!!!"
    • Yeah your right the owner was copping hand shandies while all this was going down 
    • I mean not surprised the Patriots took him in and aren't trying to push him out. They've been the most morally bankrupt team in the NFL for a long while. Wouldn't be surprised if Vrabel has his own dirt on Kraft/Brady and other assholes from that organization over the last couple decades. 
×
×
  • Create New...