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!

     

Per Schefter: Panthers operating as if Darnold will miss the season


ImaginaryKev
 Share

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, BrianS said:

You're right, no one will trade for him.  But the second part doesn't make a lick of sense.  There is no cap relief whatsoever from cutting him.

This isn't like other situations where a guy has a huge cap hit and it's only partially guaranteed.  Sam Darnold being cut is just 18 million in dead cap, next year only.  Whether he is on the roster or not, we're stuck with it.

Let him sit on the bench.

I know I just don’t even want him on the bench. Brings nothing to the backup role besides just being a good teammate. Rather have a backup that can be competent in the system. Cant stress enough how bad this dude is at football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Catsfan69 said:

If I were him I'd do whatever it took to stay in the NFL then go to Canada if I can't find a team and try and pull a Flutie or Warren Moon.

But what can he do?

He's not even good enough to be a backup in the league.

Even Mark "Buttfumble" Sanchez had a better career.

 

Edited by glenwo2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MillionDollarCam said:

I think it depends on how they view certain QB’s in the upcoming draft.

Either it doesn’t work out and they have their choice of Corral, Willis, Howell, or Pickett.

Or it does work out and they are probably only looking at a choice between Howell or Pickett.

Additionally, if it does work out then Cam is probably getting a two or three year extension.

How they view the upcoming QBs may be more of a worry than anyone knows. Their previous choices haven't been good. And Tepper may force them to take a guy even if Rhule and Co aren't sold on him just to have a rookie QB on the roster regardless of Cam's status with the team. The longer Rhule and Co are in charge the worse I feel that Tepper made a huge mistake that will set the team back that much further. And Honestly, I don't feel good about Tepper as an owner either. But we're stuck with him unless the NFL forces a sale.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jayboogieman said:

How they view the upcoming QBs may be more of a worry than anyone knows. Their previous choices haven't been good. And Tepper may force them to take a guy even if Rhule and Co aren't sold on him just to have a rookie QB on the roster regardless of Cam's status with the team. The longer Rhule and Co are in charge the worse I feel that Tepper made a huge mistake that will set the team back that much further. And Honestly, I don't feel good about Tepper as an owner either. But we're stuck with him unless the NFL forces a sale.

Tepper may have to Jerry-Jones things unfortunately. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ENCPantherfan2 said:

You may see a Chip Kelly scenario happen because of this. Tepper may ask Rhule to step back as far as FO decisions and leave everything to Fitt. 

That's not necessarily a good choice either. Yeah Fitt loves to make trades and it can be exciting, but that isn't always a good thing either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, raleigh-panther said:

Amen 

Rhule’s moves at qb in free agency and skipping on QBs and  LTs in the drafts is to me egregious and shows zero understanding of the NFL and  set this team back years 

with all the rule  changes in the past 10 years, it’s a QB driven league in the NFL where the best of the best play 

this isn’t Baylor or temple where a coach can pick up some scruff and  ‘coach em up’ at QB.  

if I’m Tepper, either Rhule is gone or some credible nfl talent evaluator is brought in as a consultant to ‘help’ him  

cam Newton has come to try and save yet another coach’s ass and that’s a fact  can he do it…,remains to be seen 

 

Or let Fitterer make the personnel decisions including the draft. 

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

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...