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!

     

Deviation from the Original Plan.. Is the Reason for this Mess..


WOW!!
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, HammerinCameron said:

There's 5 games left and were in the thick of the playoff race, and are undefeated in our division and that will continue Sunday. Stop with the doom and gloom bullshit.

Cam had a rating of 125 for Carolina a couple weeks ago, in a Panthers uni - were going to get hot and Cam will save Rhule like he did Rivera.

We're making the playoffs.

😂 LOL

Edited by TLGPanthersFan
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, HammerinCameron said:

There's 5 games left and were in the thick of the playoff race, and are undefeated in our division and that will continue Sunday. Stop with the doom and gloom bullshit.

Cam had a rating of 125 for Carolina a couple weeks ago, in a Panthers uni - were going to get hot and Cam will save Rhule like he did Rivera.

We're making the playoffs.

troll GIF

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, WOW!! said:

The problem with this thinking is Cam wanted to be paid and at that point wasn't willing to be a bridge QB.. So that was a bad situation to be in from the get go..

Then bring in competition and let him hold out if he wants to hardball. They moved aggressively because they thought Teddy was the answer and would be off the market fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, KSpan said:

Fitzpatrick, Tyrod, Dalton, Trubisky, and Jameis were all signed to 1 year deals this offseason. None of those guys are any kind of long term plan and likely wouldn't do much better, if at all, but at least someone like Trubisky has actually won some games (if they were bent on a reclamation). Any of those guys though do replace Teddy, prevent the Darnold situation, and still send the signal that wilting/failing like that 2020 offense did in crunch time isn't acceptable.

Again though, this whole thing should have been precluded in the first place by not dumping Cam as they did.

When Teddy was signed that was a done deal.  Trading him away was losing a asset on money he is being paid.. So bringing in another QB doesn't fixed the whole paying 2 ppl and still getting the same results...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

When Teddy was signed that was a done deal.  Trading him away was losing a asset on money he is being paid.. So bringing in another QB doesn't fixed the whole paying 2 ppl and still getting the same results...

It doesn't, but Teddy was a sunk cost and keeping him would have been choosing to destroy any chance of on-field success. It was a lesser-of-two-evils gamble and while the staff unfortunately did not appear to choose wisely with Darnold vs. the other options out there, that still doesn't make getting rid of Teddy the wrong decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

When Teddy was signed that was a done deal.  Trading him away was losing a asset on money he is being paid.. So bringing in another QB doesn't fixed the whole paying 2 ppl and still getting the same results...

Hmmm!! Definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, KatsAzz said:

Hmmm!! Definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Same thing was sticking to the plan and draft a young QB out of this draft.. Trading for Darnold and trading Teddy killed all that..

Be real if we probably have a better record with Teddy and if not we would have a young QB waiting in the wings right now instead of QB purgatory we are in now. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, KSpan said:

It doesn't, but Teddy was a sunk cost and keeping him would have been choosing to destroy any chance of on-field success. It was a lesser-of-two-evils gamble and while the staff unfortunately did not appear to choose wisely with Darnold vs. the other options out there, that still doesn't make getting rid of Teddy the wrong decision.

Keeping him I feel would have guaranteed we drafted a QB this year.. Getting Sam destroyed that option...

And reality is if we'd stayed with the plan we could have had a better record with Teddy and if not Atleast a young QB learning and waiting in the wings to take over..

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Icege said:

This was literally the point of the thread that I made, but somehow folks thought it was a pro-Teddy thread in spite of explicitly stating at the very beginning that it isn't pro-Teddy.

Exactly not Pro Teddy.. Its Pro have patience stick to the rebuild and have a better outlook with a bridge QB a young QB and all of our assets..

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WOW!! said:

Keeping him I feel would have guaranteed we drafted a QB this year.. Getting Sam destroyed that option...

And reality is if we'd stayed with the plan we could have had a better record with Teddy and if not Atleast a young QB learning and waiting in the wings to take over..

 

2 hours ago, WOW!! said:

Exactly not Pro Teddy.. Its Pro have patience stick to the rebuild and have a better outlook with a bridge QB a young QB and all of our assets..

I don't know that this staff and/or FO were ever going to draft a QB this year with how the picks fell. Agreed that that may have been the deviation, but disagree that cutting Teddy was deviating.

The fundamental issue here is that they were only out a few million by moving Teddy (bit retained/gained credibility in the process) but then appear to have flopped by trading for Sam (and then signing the 5th year) and giving up draft capital. Booting Teddy exhibits a commitment to winning (even if more of a facade), and bringing in any of those guys I mentioned earlier on a 1 yr deal retains that and the bridge.

Rhule would have killed any credibility he had at the time by trotting out a player again that no one had any kind of confidence in whatsoever. After that 2020 performance, keeping Teddy as a starter would have been an automatic white flag on the season, and there's still no guarantee the staff drafts a QB. They're 2 different things.

Edited by KSpan
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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...