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

By Happy Panther,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted

Watson by himself obviously doesn’t make us an elite team. IF we get him we will be retaining some of our talent (Moore, Brown, Chinn, YGM, hopefully Burns/Anderson). The main reason our GM is cleaning out our salary is to build a team around Watson if we manage to get him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Pup McBarky said:

And that is my point. TB has a really good OL and a dominant defense before Brady got there.

but again, Brady's 20 year career in NE tells the other side of that story. 

He didn't always have the weapons and the OL.  But they were going to win.  Maybe they aren't the 15-1 Moss Patriots.  But they were still the double digit winning playoff Patriots. 

and you can look at Rodgers, Wilson, etc.  Elite QBs win with or without the well built team.  Odds just improve when you give them good teams. 

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CRA said:

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. 

We tried this formula once already.

It didn't go so well.

We are not a good enough team to be "just a quarterback away". And the notion that this description applies to every NFL team just isn't factual.

I'm all for getting Watson, but if you hamstring yourself from building around him all you've done is make a football version of O Henry's "Gift of the Maji" story.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Watson by himself obviously doesn’t make us an elite team. IF we get him we will be retaining some of our talent (Moore, Brown, Chinn, YGM, hopefully Burns/Anderson). The main reason our GM is cleaning out our salary is to build a team around Watson if we manage to get him. 

I'm only really an advocate for trading draft picks.   Not bodies.  RBs and Teddy not included. 

We got talent for Watson to work with here and a young and improving D. 

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
Just now, CRA said:

I'm only really an advocate for trading draft picks.   Not bodies.  RBs and Teddy not included. 

We got talent for Watson to work with here and a young and improving D. 

Pretty much nobody believes that draft picks alone are going to be enough to make that trade, if  Houston even agrees to make it at all (which is not guaranteed).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

We tried this formula once already.

It didn't go so well.

We are not a good enough team to be "just a quarterback away". And the notion that this description applies to every NFL team just isn't factual.

I'm all for getting Watson, but if you hamstring yourself from building around him all you've done is make a football version of O Henry's "Gift of the Maji" story.

Well, I am a big believer Cam Newton was a unicorn and has no comparison in the NFL.  The NFL game isn't exactly rigged for Cam's style like it is other QBs.   Plus, he was Cam which always came with a unique bias IMO. 

I think Cam is a HOF worthy QB.  Huge fan.  But even at his prime (which was the best player in the NFL), Cam was never a consistent passer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheCasillas Grand Master

TheCasillas

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

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

I think there is a fair argument that if Watson was our QB last year... we would have a winning record. We will never know, but it was obvious that QB play was our weakest link last year.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Pretty much nobody believes that draft picks alone are going to be enough to make that trade, if  Houston even agrees to make it at all (which is not guaranteed).

I'm down with picks.  I'm down with CMC and Teddy.   That's always been my position. Getting rid of that doesn't present the Jonathan Stewart assertion.   We didn't even have CMC last year and competed with everyone but the Super Bowl champ.  

and if we threw in one more player? Depends on who it is.  

 

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, CRA said:

I'm down with picks.  I'm down with CMC and Teddy.   That's always been my position. Getting rid of that doesn't present the Jonathan Stewart assertion.   We didn't even have CMC last year and competed with everyone but the Super Bowl champ.  

and if we threw in one more player? Depends on who it is.  

McCaffrey's not gonna happen. Voth explained why.

King and Schrager both speculated on Brian Burns. Schrager added Robby Anderson.

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

    • Joe Bear
      2026 World Cup Thread

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • rebelrouser
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By rebelrouser · Posted

      Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...