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!

     

Voth on the QB situation...

*FreeFua*

By *FreeFua*,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, jtm said:

Also, I’d love to keep Bridgewater in Carolina, but as a back up. He strikes me as the kind of guy that probably realizes his future in the NFL is as a back up. 

IMO, he's the best salvage option if we can't trade for Watson and we can't land a QB in the draft. Unfortunately, other teams probably have that exact same thought which might drive his trade value significantly over what it should be. In that case, Trubisky might be the best bad option. If possible, I'd prefer to give up a mid-round pick for Minshew and his dirt cheap late round rookie contract as opposed to keeping our picks and signing Trubisky to a significantly more expensive deal.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

What we did spamming picks on defense last year... we can do that on the OL too. There's also free agency and there will be some surprise cap casualties. I don't expect us to be signing marquee FAs, but you don't have to spend huge money to upgrade from what we currently have.

Wouldn't mind that, and we'd be doing so with a better talent evaluator running the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Waldo Grand Master

Waldo

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Probably.

Is it really their fault though?

Heck, Fitterer wasn't even here when we signed him.

Doesn't matter, they are in charge and if they can't right the ship then on to the next. I pay for seats, I'm not waiting for them to figure the NFL out. Fair just isn't part of that equation.

Really it would be Teppers fault but there is one way to clean it up and that's to flush the toilet and see if he has learned anything on the next load. Hire a good GM first and not this mess he looks to have created with keeping Hurney one extra year. Just dumb but here we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Waldo said:

It has started for me for sure.

Should have kicked in full force when he kept Ron and Marty in year 1.

Should have ticked you off with the "fix the business side first" crap.

Should have pissed you off when a practice facility in SC was more important than fixing coaching and front office staff.

He bought a loser, and kept losers in charge...when he earns my support, he'll get it.

  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

I wouldn't say I've turned on him, but I'm still not settled on whether he's a good owner or not.

That judgment depends a lot on whether he stays hands off like he said he would.

Doesn't have my respect or support until I see some good decisions coming out of there on a consistent basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Should have kicked in full force when he kept Ron and Marty in year 1.

Should have ticked you off with the "fix the business side first" crap.

Should have pissed you off when a practice facility in SC was more important than fixing coaching and front office staff.

He bought a loser, and kept losers in charge...when he earns my support, he'll get it.

Those are all fair criticisms.

My thing is that since he did finally fire Marty, he deferred to Matt Rhule on what kind of GM to hire and he's promised to let Fitterer and Rhule run the show, I have some hope that things will get better.

That said, it hasn't escaped notice that he was previously preaching patience and he's not necessarily looking all that patient right now, so... 😕

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Waldo Grand Master

Waldo

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Should have kicked in full force when he kept Ron and Marty in year 1.

Should have ticked you off with the "fix the business side first" crap.

Should have pissed you off when a practice facility in SC was more important than fixing coaching and front office staff.

He bought a loser, and kept losers in charge...when he earns my support, he'll get it.

I see Tepper as hurdle #1. If my fears of Fritters comes true, it's going to be loud and ugly real fast. In on every deal is something an idiot says.

Edited by Waldo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Fox007 said:

An actual anagram for Teddy Bridgewater is: Warty Bedded Tiger
Imagine that poo for a second

Then like:
Ratty Big Rewedded
War Bettered Giddy
Watery Debt Ridged
Tart Bridged Weedy
Dater Derby Widget (lol)

Eerie!!  That settles it.  Teddy Bridgewater it is.

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

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...