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!

     

When has a blockbuster NFL trade worked out for the team who gives up everything?


Happy Panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

What was the Texans record last year?

they had a losing record.  Watson's only losing season.  Pros.  College. High School.  

but I am sure it had nothing to do with the shitshow going on with that franchise that is well documented during a COVID year.  Watson just isn't a big enough difference maker. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:

Everyone keeps saying this, like Gronk, Fournette, and AB don't matter. They probably don't make the SB without AB taking the best CB on other teams.

They went there because Brady went there. That's another advantage of getting the big time qb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yet the argument I'm having presented to me is that trading for Watson alone makes us winners.

in simple terms? Yes. 

The team that has Watson will be winners overall.   Just like the team who had Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson, etc.    The team who has certain QBs is going to overall win.  Because the game is literally designed for them to be winners. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CRA said:

they had a losing record.  Watson's only losing season.  Pros.  College. High School.  

but I am sure it had nothing to do with the shitshow going on with that franchise that is well documented during a COVID year.  Watson just isn't a big enough difference maker. 

 

So basically...

"Watson is all we need!"

"Why haven't they been winning in Houston then?"

"Football is a team sport!"

🤔

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

in simple terms? Yes. 

The team that has Watson will be winners overall.   Just like the team who had Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson, etc.    The team who has certain QBs is going to overall win.  Because the game is literally designed for them to be winners. 

 

When Geoff Schwartz tweeted about Panther fans thinking that just getting Watson made us a championship team, I saw a few people respond "nobody is saying this".

Apparently, they were wrong.

Edited by Mr. Scot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pup McBarky said:

This is true, but not to the degree that this board thinks it is. If it were, the Texans wouldn't have a losing record in Watson's best year. And while some OLs in NE weren't stellar, I'd never say any of them were weak.

I mean, JJ Watt called out the team for basically not even putting in the effort last season....in season. 

People putting all their stock in this ONE season where the franchise literally created a place where people didn't want to be and work.  The culture is well documented.  

So yeah, it is a team sport.  You need people bought in.  Working hard.  But Watson has proven at every level....he is enough to put a team over pending the basic elements are there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

"Why haven't they been winning in Houston then?"

again, Watson has one losing season to his name.  Pros.  College.  HS.  He puts teams on his back.  To quote the great Dabo Sweeney, he is Michael Jordan. 

Watson isn't enough to overcome an owner/GM that make a place miserable and where teammates are no longer working.  That's NFL great JJ Watt talking. But that is all you got to hang your hat on IMO. 

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

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...