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!

     

Report: The Panthers are "locked on Watson"

MVPccaffrey

By MVPccaffrey,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

MechaZain Grand Master

MechaZain

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, DeAngelo Beason said:

He's just worth it.  That's all there is to it.  Opportunities like this just don't come up.  There aren't any times in league history that I can think of where a franchise player of this caliber came available right as he was reaching his prime.

Yep. I say it a lot Tep's a hedgefund guy. He's going to invest in a proven commodity before rolling the dice on us finding one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catsfan69 Grand Master

Catsfan69

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

We have more reason to think he is smart than we do that he is stupid... what proof do we have that he has done something stupid enough to question his intelligence?

 

I have several personal opinions based on his stated desires and actions regarding this team that do not in my opinion have anything to do with winning a championship. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YourLastThought Mentor

YourLastThought

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

yes. get on board or get run over

And give up first round draft choices for 3-4 years as well as an impact player? Id say if we do that deal we are the ones who will be "run over" by far. Seriously, how do you think they are going to build around the loss of so many draft picks, an impact player and his big ass contract? If you want a recipe for guaranteed failure this is it. But at least we will have a solid QB right?

  • Pie 3
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Panthers Rhule said:

Can you name me the teams that you think are still in our going for Watson as of right now and what they would logically give up for him? I'm curious. I don't expect a bidding war anymore so if they trade him he's going to be cheaper than a lot of folks believe he'll be. I say 3 picks. 4 max and not all number 1s either. They should have traded him 2 weeks ago

I think the Niners could put together a pretty attractive offer. 

Bosa, Kinlaw, Aiyuk, Warner (although he’s a FA after this year). 

At the end of the day he’s still a franchise QB. Obviously we don’t want to be bidding against ourselves but I can’t imagine there aren’t others

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Growl Grand Master

Growl

Posted
Posted (edited)

If we're trading a haul for Watson then were going to have to be better in free agency than we have so far

If we aren't, then were fine, but if you're moving that kind of draft capital then you have to be better than what we've done

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Its fair to say that he doesnt have the football smarts, but you dont have to be a genius to understand the kind of talent that Watson brings to the table. To call him stupid... thats pretty extreme. The guy was a co-owner of ths Steelers for a long time as well. So he understands how football operations are run. 

Jim Haslam was part of the Steelers ownership group for a while too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott12345 Grand Master

Scott12345

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, YourLastThought said:

And give up first round draft choices for 3-4 years as well as an impact player? Id say if we do that deal we are the ones who will be "run over" by far. Seriously, how do you think they are going to build around the loss of so many draft picks, an impact player and his big ass contract? If you want a recipe for guaranteed failure this is it. But at least we will have a solid QB right?

and the huddle GM's will be happy

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Khyber53 Grand Master

Khyber53

Posted
Posted

So, let me get this straight. A dude working in the organization of another team that is interested in QBs says Carolina is locked on Watson? 

Not a guy from Carolina's organization.

Not a guy from Houston's management team.

Not Watson's agent's barber's third cousin.

And y'all are going apesh!t over this? Means nothing. And that's a good thing. 

If Tepper gets his trade and gives away three first round draft picks and three of our star players... Let's just say if you hated Jerry Richardson, you are really really really going to end up hating Tepper.

  • Pie 5
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Waldo Grand Master

Waldo

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Scott12345 said:

its not true...not even close

That's the hope because that model = massive failure.

Edit: wait are you saying what I said wasn't true because it's a fact twice with one freebie

Edited by Waldo
  • Pie 1
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...