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!

     

we were the only ones who wanted sam darnold lol


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

“Surest, safest, cheapest” of the options left. I don’t know the ins and outs of why we fell short on Stafford but with the price tag he went for I don’t blame them for not raising the stakes if Watson was still on the table. 

It came down to that extra 1st for Stafford, according to the reports. In hindsight, I kind of wish we had just pulled the trigger on that. But hindsight couldn't have told us the way all this ended up going down.

I think we are going to find out how sure, safe and cheap it is. My big fear is that Darnold proves to be less sure, safe and cheap than a journeyman backup from the free agent pile would have been. That is my big fear.

For all his potential, his floor is really, really, REALLY low.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

It came down to that extra 1st for Stafford, according to the reports. In hindsight, I kind of wish we had just pulled the trigger on that. But hindsight couldn't have told us the way all this ended up going down.

I think we are going to find out how sure, safe and cheap it is. My big fear is that Darnold proves to be less sure, safe and cheap than a journeyman backup from the free agent pile would have been. That is my big fear.

For all his potential, his floor is really, really, REALLY low.

I couldn't in good conscious give up 3 1st round picks for a 30+ year old QB and say that was a good move I can't..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

It came down to that extra 1st for Stafford, according to the reports. In hindsight, I kind of wish we had just pulled the trigger on that. But hindsight couldn't have told us the way all this ended up going down.

I think we are going to find out how sure, safe and cheap it is. My big fear is that Darnold proves to be less sure, safe and cheap than a journeyman backup from the free agent pile would have been. That is my big fear.

For all his potential, his floor is really, really, REALLY low.

All things considered he should have just as many tools offensively as Teddy did last year. A healthy CMC and a stud LT would give us zero excuse not to win games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were more teams interested, they just stopped being interested after QB situations were solved, once it became clear they had no leverage because they were obviously drafting Wilson (lol except for the Panthers I guess), and they realized there was not much budging on a price tag. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

I couldn't in good conscious give up 3 1st round picks for a 30+ year old QB and say that was a good move I can't..

Well, it would have only been giving up 2(1 was just a straight swap so you still have a 1st). I definitely understand that. Stafford has some injury history, so you need to really be convinced he is healthy enough and WANTS to stick around until 40 to invest like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Verge said:

There were more teams interested, they just stopped being interested after QB situations were solved, once it became clear they had no leverage because they were obviously drafting Wilson (lol except for the Panthers I guess), and they realized there was not much budging on a price tag. 

I am guessing the interest was largely bargain bin shopping by QB needy teams?

It doesn't seem like the league really views Darnold as much more than a cheap reclamation project. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Do you think the head coach or the offensive coordinator set contract terms?

How about the guy they hired from the Steelers that was supposed to take care of all that? And do you actually believe that Hurney signed TB to that contract without running it by anyone else in the organization? Especially the 70M head coach. How come no other Panther reporter of any kind has put this on Hurney? Just one biased fan. Anything besides him? Where is Hurney mentioned in this article? Who is everyone blaming this next fiasco on? My money is on whoever is let go or leaves first. As usual. 

 

https://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/34244/teddy-bridgewater-becoming-to-panthers-what-drew-brees-is-to-saints
 

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Long before Teddy Bridgewaterwas introduced to then offensive assistant Joe Brady with the New Orleans Saints, long before the Carolina Panthers' personnel department made Bridgewater the player to replace franchise quarterback Cam Newton, the former Louisville star was on coach Matt Rhule’s radar.

It was about seven years ago. Rhule, then the coach at Temple, watched on television as Bridgewater played for the Minnesota Vikings. Evan Cooper, his director of external operations and, like Bridgewater, a native of Miami, was with him.

“We always joked like, 'If you ever get one of those [NFL] jobs, that’s the first guy you should go after,'" Cooper recalled.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Toomers said:

How about the guy they hired from the Steelers that was supposed to take care of all that? And do you actually believe that Hurney signed TB to that contract without running it by anyone else in the organization? Especially the 70M head coach. How come no other Panther reporter of any kind has put this on Hurney? Just one biased fan. Anything besides him? Where is Hurney mentioned in this article? Who is everyone blaming this next fiasco on? My money is on whoever is let go or leaves first. As usual. 

 

https://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/34244/teddy-bridgewater-becoming-to-panthers-what-drew-brees-is-to-saints
 

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Long before Teddy Bridgewaterwas introduced to then offensive assistant Joe Brady with the New Orleans Saints, long before the Carolina Panthers' personnel department made Bridgewater the player to replace franchise quarterback Cam Newton, the former Louisville star was on coach Matt Rhule’s radar.

It was about seven years ago. Rhule, then the coach at Temple, watched on television as Bridgewater played for the Minnesota Vikings. Evan Cooper, his director of external operations and, like Bridgewater, a native of Miami, was with him.

“We always joked like, 'If you ever get one of those [NFL] jobs, that’s the first guy you should go after,'" Cooper recalled.

If you really want to continue debating who knows more about the organization between you and Roaring Riot, I can pretty much guarantee you're going to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

If you really want to continue debating who knows more about the organization between you and Roaring Riot, I can pretty much guarantee you're going to lose.

I have never claimed one speck of “inside” information from anything related to the Panthers. Coming from someone that will post anything ever printed to back up any theory, your best response is this. No other evidence. Just “because he said so” against every bit of print and just plain common sense. That’s why you didn’t even attempt to answer any of it. The article has quotes about  7 years ago. Your “source” mentioned it on here hours after Hurney was fired. Not before. I had said that Hurney would be the scapegoat for anything that goes wrong the first year. Hmmm....what happened? He was exactly that. 

   You don’t have to be in/near the Panthers to know who makes decisions and whether they are good or bad ones. I’ve been doing it for years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Toomers said:

I have never claimed one speck of “inside” information from anything related to the Panthers. Coming from someone that will post anything ever printed to back up any theory, your best response is this. No other evidence. Just “because he said so” against every bit of print and just plain common sense. That’s why you didn’t even attempt to answer any of it. The article has quotes about  7 years ago. Your “source” mentioned it on here hours after Hurney was fired. Not before. I had said that Hurney would be the scapegoat for anything that goes wrong the first year. Hmmm....what happened? He was exactly that. 

   You don’t have to be in/near the Panthers to know who makes decisions and whether they are good or bad ones. I’ve been doing it for years. 

I don't need inside information to know that GMs who regularly deal in contracts don't run them past college coaches (and assistant coaches) who have no experience with them at all.

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

    • Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • 1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control  Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst roster in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most voliate franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete diaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
    • I think he has started to build a culture here.  I think if we had a qb with no limitations we would be seeing a lot more with the offense.  I think most of the coaches that come in and instantly win went to teams that were underachieving previously based on roster talent level.  Based on our roster talent,  we werent underachieving,  we were just bad.
×
×
  • Create New...