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!

     

Deshaun Watson? Yes? No?, or Meh?

iamhubby1

By iamhubby1,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Deshaun Watson? Yes? No?, or Meh?  

125 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you want Deshaun Watson on this team? All answers are made public.

    • Yes. I want to win.
      36
    • No. Sure I want to win. But not at the expense of my Compassion, nor my Mortal Soul.
      75
    • Meh, I don't care one way or the other. I just like watching teh Foosball.
      6
    • Other. If so, then why?
      7

Recommended Posts

MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, CBDellinger said:

terrible analog. 

 

 

Your point was that it takes a conviction to dissuade you from wanting him--my point is that the image is the important thing--not the conviction.  A conviction only tells you what 12 people (or so) thought and how good his attorney was vs. Prosecutors. Money tends to win in the courtrooms, but you want to use convictions as the only determination of his character---but turn the tables, and it is a "terrible analog." The only thing that matters is what hiring him does to the bottom line and the image you are trying to market---OJ Simpson is not doing commercials today and he was innocent--why not?   Just exposing hypocrisy. 

Edited by MHS831
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, CBDellinger said:

terrible analog. 

 

Well said.  I have no idea who he is or is not and I am not about to venture into that world. 

Yeah, I would think that we should have all learned by now that trial by public opinion or certainly by media doesn't mean a lot. From a PR standpoint, perhaps so, which is a genuine issue that has to be considered in a league that has public perception to worry about.

Even the resolution of a civil and/or criminal case is no guarantee that we actually would know any of the real facts. Just that the theatrics are completed and we have an ultimate result. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, I mean that much is pretty obvious, I would think. I understand the "buy low" crowd thinks now might be the time to strike but there isn't a team in the NFL that is going to make a deal for him until the entire ordeal is sorted out or at least behind the scenes there are some assurances about the result and the NFL's plan for him.

Hell, we've had people on here that wanted us to give up picks for Josh Gordon, Justin Blackmon and even Titus Young. And all with the rationale that they'd never be cheaper than when they were in trouble.

Some folks really don't understand how the world works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Hell, we've had people on here that wanted us to give up picks for Josh Gordon, Justin Blackmon and even Titus Young. And all with the rationale that they'd never be cheaper than when they were in trouble.

Some folks really don't understand how the world works.

With those bust players, people are always going to keep seeing potential, no matter what. Hell, we have a large chunk of people buying into a very obvious bust QB that we traded for based on that potential. So, I do understand how it can be enticing. 

This is a different scenario, however. Watson's abilities are completely unquestioned, it just boils down to whether he is going to be possible to sign for a while. If things go poorly, I would suspect we see a Mike Vick type situation, where he is out of the league for a bit and then eventually comes back "rehabilitated." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CBDellinger Mentor

CBDellinger

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, MHS831 said:

Your point was that it takes a conviction to dissuade you from wanting him--my point is that the image is the important thing--not the conviction.  A conviction only tells you what 12 people (or so) thought and how good his attorney was vs. Prosecutors. Money tends to win in the courtrooms, but you want to use convictions as the only determination of his character-it as a excuse when it benefits your cause--but turn the tables, and it is a "terrible analog." Just exposing hypocrisy.  

Does that simplify it enough for you?

The two situations are nothing alike.  We know very little about the Watson case and what little we do know is mostly from one side.  You used one of the most publicized murder cases of all time, one where every detail was shared and broadcast on TV live, has been rehashed and relived in countless documentaries and somehow you twisted it into some hypothetical branding situation thats not based in reality what so ever.  So yeah, its a terrible analog. I'll stand by that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

This is a business. 

Tell me, OJ Simpson was found to be innocent in a court of law.  Would you hire him to be your company's spokesperson? 

Ray Lewis is one of the most iconic and beloved players in NFL history.  Also not a snitch. 

If OJ had been 25 and capable of putting up a 2k season….I’m not confident he wouldn’t of played again. 

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

With those bust players, people are always going to keep seeing potential, no matter what. Hell, we have a large chunk of people buying into a very obvious bust QB that we traded for based on that potential. So, I do understand how it can be enticing. 

This is a different scenario, however. Watson's abilities are completely unquestioned, it just boils down to whether he is going to be possible to sign for a while. If things go poorly, I would suspect we see a Mike Vick type situation, where he is out of the league for a bit and then eventually comes back "rehabilitated." 

None of those guys were what I'd call "busts" ability wise. They were good to great players who just couldn't stay out of trouble off the field.

We used to have three or four posters on here that it was pretty much guaranteed if you saw somebody was in trouble or in danger of getting suspended, they'd immediately start a thread screaming that we should trade first round picks for them.

  • Beer 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

    • woahfraze
      This Bryce Guy (General BY Discussion)

      By woahfraze · Posted

      I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • CRA
      A question no one is asking about Bryce and The Panthers

      By CRA · Posted

      The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • ImfromClayton
      Hubbard says he might have rushed back

      By ImfromClayton · Posted

      One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...