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!

     

Quick Hits from Fitterer's Press Conference


hepcat
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, BurnNChinn said:

Did nobody ask him anything about Watson, that would seem weird with all the reports coming out that we are definitely interested 

No point in asking.  A coach or GM is not allowed to talk about another player on another team.  The most you could ask is if the team is looking to acquire a new QB.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, BurnNChinn said:

Yeah I don’t think that had to do with Watson though imo.

Agreed that the response was not in a direct reference to Watson, however; if "we're not one player away" is the sentiment of the team, I would argue it's applicable to how the team may view spending the kind of resources it will take to acquire Watson. 

7 minutes ago, Mage said:

No point in asking.  A coach or GM is not allowed to talk about another player on another team.  The most you could ask is if the team is looking to acquire a new QB.

This is as close as Rhule got to addressing Watson, a complete non-answer. If Rhule or Fitterer had said anything remotely suggestive of progress on the Watson front, there'd be seven threads on it already.

Joe Person: Will you look into these other quarterbacks who may be available via trade?

Rhule: At every position, we'll always look at every opportunity. One of the things Scott [Fitterer] said when we interviewed was we want to be in on every deal. I think one of the advantages to that is a, we're always getting information and b, you know, other teams look at us and they can't say they know what we're going to do because we're always looking at everything. If someone hits the market, we're always going to talk to them. We'll look at everything this year. Just take it day by day.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Panther'sBigD said:

LOL, you guys will tell yourselves anything to maintain the idea that the Panthers are actually going to compete for Watson. It's not going to happen. 

You probably said (or thought) the same thing about Stafford. 

I wouldn't bet that we're going to land Watson, but I will bet that we're going to put in a trade offer. We "competed" for Stafford and almost got him. We'll do the same for Watson if he ever hits the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, top dawg said:

You probably said (or thought) the same thing about Stafford. 

I wouldn't bet that we're going to land Watson, but I will bet that we're going to put in a trade offer. We "competed" for Stafford and almost got him. We'll do the same for Watson if he ever hits the market.

It was more a comment on I think trueblade's assertion that the "we aren't one player away" comment could be taken to mean that since we're not one player away, they're fine with going ahead and nuking the team by trading away 8-10 players for one guy. I think that's ridiculous. 

I was on board for Stafford. What they were asking for Stafford was fairly reasonable. Didn't it only require about three picks and Goff? That's nothing like the 'multi-year 1sts, 2nds, 3rds, plus starters' asking price projected for Watson. 

I think they should absolutely be involved in every deal, but it's ridiculous fan-level delusion to think we should trade away the next few years for one guy, when it will put the Panthers in exactly the kind of situation Watson is currently trying to escape. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, shaqattaq said:

Scott is cheap, decent depth and I still have hope that Daley makes a good LG. Little is bad. No way in hell we roll into the season with these 3.

Scott is a guy worth keeping for depth. Daley will likely just never be able to stay healthy and Little is just terrible. 

I don't think Little will last long after he is gone from here. Maybe a PS spot or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Scott is a guy worth keeping for depth. Daley will likely just never be able to stay healthy and Little is just terrible. 

I don't think Little will last long after he is gone from here. Maybe a PS spot or two.

Scott actually wound up looking a lot better than I thought he would.

Still wouldn't want him as a long-term starter though.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, it's not like Rhule was asked a real question about Watson.

David Newton clumsily worded a question to shoehorn in a mention of Watson as part of what he was asking. Rhule didn't bite on it.

That was followed later on by the lady reporter taking a funny dig at Newton.

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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...