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!

     

Peter King has us taking Justin Fields

GoobyPls

By GoobyPls,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, App Panther said:

I have no idea how so many people are on board with Fields after the Darnold trade. It just makes that move look like total incompetence. 

If Darnold is good, what happens to Fields? Traded for a lesser pick?

 

If Darnold stinks, Fields starts around mid-year and we blew those picks. Not saying Fields is bad choice at all, but it would just really leave a sour taste in mouth after giving up what we did for Darnold.

 

It would be total incompetence.  How foolish would we be to think we have the staff to coach up Fields and make him an NFL qb but not the same for Darnold.  Roll with Darnold next year and build the fuging line.  Dont get cute

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldhamA Grand Master

OldhamA

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, App Panther said:

I have no idea how so many people are on board with Fields after the Darnold trade. It just makes that move look like total incompetence. 

If Darnold is good, what happens to Fields? Traded for a lesser pick?

 

If Darnold stinks, Fields starts around mid-year and we blew those picks. Not saying Fields is bad choice at all, but it would just really leave a sour taste in mouth after giving up what we did for Darnold.

 

Again, we gave up the equivalent of our third round pick this year to acquire Darnold.

In the grand scheme of things that's nothing. 

If one of the QBs they love unexpectedly falls to #8 I could understand them taking him. 

As with the rest of the off-season, they've positioned the team so that it has no glaring holes. Obviously multiple positions are easily upgradable, but you're not forced to draft a particular position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
firefox1234 Grand Master

firefox1234

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, App Panther said:

I have no idea how so many people are on board with Fields after the Darnold trade. It just makes that move look like total incompetence. 

If Darnold is good, what happens to Fields? Traded for a lesser pick?

 

If Darnold stinks, Fields starts around mid-year and we blew those picks. Not saying Fields is bad choice at all, but it would just really leave a sour taste in mouth after giving up what we did for Darnold.

 

I see where you are coming from and a couple years ago I would agree but not anymore.

If you don't have a franchise QB and you aren't actively looking for one then you're doing something wrong. Just look at the Cardinals. Our incompetence started by paying Teddy and arguably not going after Herbert. The sour taste in my mouth has never left and it came way before signing Darnold.

Edited by firefox1234
  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

Again, we gave up the equivalent of our third round pick this year to acquire Darnold.

In the grand scheme of things that's nothing. 

If one of the QBs they love unexpectedly falls to #8 I could understand them taking him. 

As with the rest of the off-season, they've positioned the team so that it has no glaring holes. Obviously multiple positions are easily upgradable, but you're not forced to draft a particular position.

If we were in love with Fields and thought he was a franchise qb we would have made the trade with Miami

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldhamA Grand Master

OldhamA

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

If we were in love with Fields and thought he was a franchise qb we would have made the trade with Miami

Again, they've set themselves up so that they don't have to make that franchise crippling trade.

If Fields (or Jones or Lance or hell even Wilson, who really knows?) falls to #8 and they have him rated significantly higher than Darnold then you take him.

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
Just now, OldhamA said:

Again, they've set themselves up so that they don't have to make that franchise crippling trade.

If Fields (or Jones or Lance or hell even Wilson, who really knows?) falls to #8 and they have him rated significantly higher than Darnold then you take him.

Nah.  I think they were so out of their minds in trying to get a qb they would have made the trade if they like fields.  They were ready to give up the farm for watson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldhamA Grand Master

OldhamA

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Nah.  I think they were so out of their minds in trying to get a qb they would have made the trade if they like fields.  They were ready to give up the farm for watson. 

We don't actually know if / what they offered for Watson.

They offered #8, a 5th and Teddy Bridgwater (to get his contract off our books) for Stafford - an established upper echelon NFL QB.

Not trading the farm for the chance to draft a College player fits in with that valuation.

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

jayboogieman

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

As with the rest of the off-season, they've positioned the team so that it has no glaring holes. Obviously multiple positions are easily upgradable, but you're not forced to draft a particular position.

If they don't think Darnold is good enough to be the guy, then they traded one glaring hole(Teddy) for another(Sam). And that is stupid for a team saying they want more picks in the draft, not less since they traded picks for Darnold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Nah.  I think they were so out of their minds in trying to get a qb they would have made the trade if they like fields.  They were ready to give up the farm for watson. 

No comparison. Watson is a young proven high level NFL QB. Fields is an intriguing, talented draft prospect. Watson is a lot more valuable. Well, WAS.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

No comparison. Watson is a young proven high level NFL QB. Fields is an intriguing, talented draft prospect. Watson is a lot more valuable. Well, WAS.

Sure but Tepper was/is(?) hellbent on moving from Teddy and if the staff thought that Fields could become our Watson (minus the rub and tugs) then they would have went and gotten the pick.  I dont think they like watson, jones and most certainly not Lance

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
      Panthers NFC South Champs!

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      XL could easily be the last dog at the bowl for WR production next year.  That could leave him around 200-300 yards which would be disastrous.
    • tukafan21
      Panthers NFC South Champs!

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      Well sure, that's where the disconnect is then. If Thielen only gets 300-400 yards and T-Mac is healthy for the full season, then I'm with you guys, in that scenario there is absolutely zero excuse for him to not put up over 1,000 yards.   In fact, I'll let you double that, if Thielen has only 600 yards, then again, my expectations are for T-Mac to surpass the 1k mark with ease. But his game has never been about his physical abilities, so even if he loses a half a step, he's still the same player who is a savvy route runner who will get open and Bryce will continue to find him due to their chemistry.  Particularly since Bryce isn't a QB who forces things, he takes what the defense gives him.  So when teams focus on T-Mac and Thielen is more free to find those holes in the defense than he has the last two years, I don't think Bryce is going to ignore him. If someone wants to argue for T-Mac getting to 1,000 yards, personally, I'd say those yards would be far more likelier to come from XL and Coker than Thielen.  And that has nothing to do with XL or Coker, but that I'm still a firm believer in Thielen being able to still get 50-60 yards a game, again, particularly as he'll have less defensive attention on him than in either of his 2 seasons with us so far. Just because T-Mac is our #1 of the future who will have the ball forced to him at times, doesn't mean he needs to be forced into that role from day 1 when we have 3 very legitimate WR options next to him. Let the rookie grow into the role and the NFL game, we have that ability to do so because of Thielen, XL, and Coker.
    • TheSpecialJuan
      Panthers sign International Pathway Player

      By TheSpecialJuan · Posted

      Spot on. He's only 20 and his height 6'2 and weight 230lbs might make him more of an off-ball LB possibility. He's a multi-year project
×
×
  • Create New...