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!

     

Go Get Watson

USDepartmentOfSavagery
 Share

Recommended Posts

PandaMan Mentor

PandaMan

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Panthercougar68 said:

I feel like he is getting the Ron treatment (As most coaches do) We love him when we win lothe him when we lose.

That’s what kinda what I was gathering as well.  The rose colored glasses are strong, but I think Burrow is that good though where he can overcome those Taylor deficiencies.  Taylor has definitely improved but he’s not even middle of the pack yet imo.  The fans love him and the Bengals look great so he’s gonna get some leeway with this run 

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, USDepartmentOfSavagery said:

Clearly we are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Enjoy mediocrity and QB purgatory. 

If you think a good quarterback is enough to win championships without good coaching and roster management around him, you don't know what you're watching.

Until we get somebody in leadership who can coach and build a team better than Matt Rhule, it doesn't matter who the quarterback is.

Fix the biggest problem first. Then we can talk about the others.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stuart Smith Mentor

Stuart Smith

Posted
Posted

It will be interesting to see how the situation with Watson unfolds. If the Panthers are interested there are several teams that may be interested in addition to the Panthers. Philadelphia, Washington, Denver, Chicago, Minnesota, New York (Giants), and possibly New Orleans. If Brady does not come back you can throw Tampa Bay in that mix. I think it may depend a lot on which teams feel they won’t lose half their fan base if they sign him. It will be in Watson’s and Houston’s interest to resolve this before the NFL draft. The quarterback carousel will be interesting this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
top dawg Grand Master

top dawg

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Watson would not fix the poo-ton of issues that Matt Rhule has created for this team. Paying 3 first round picks for him would only hurt us more. 

We aren't a QB away from being good. We're a QB, OL, and entire coaching staff away. 

That's really not the point.

You get a franchise QB when you can. You can worry about all the particulars as time goes on. Even the Bengals have turned their fortunes around though their team isn't perfect. Franchise QBs do not grow on trees. If you have an opportunity to land one, you have to take it because those opportunities don't come around often.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricky Spanish Grand Master

Ricky Spanish

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, top dawg said:

That's really not the point.

You get a franchise QB when you can. You can worry about all the particulars as time goes on. Even the Bengals have turned their fortunes around though their team isn't perfect. Franchise QBs do not grow on trees. If you have an opportunity to land one, you have to take it because those opportunities don't come around often.

A few things though:

a) I doubt he would actually waive his no trade clause for us

b) We can't afford his contract

c) If we somehow got him and afforded his contract, we wouldn't be able to field a competitive team with him

d) He's an accused rapist who has not settled his legal disputes

Nothing about trading for Watson makes sense. 

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ricky Spanish said:

A few things though:

a) I doubt he would actually waive his no trade clause for us

b) We can't afford his contract

c) If we somehow got him and afforded his contract, we wouldn't be able to field a competitive team with him

d) He's an accused rapist who has not settled his legal disputes

Nothing about trading for Watson makes sense. 

"We should get a franchise quarterback" and "we should get Deshaun Watson" are not the same argument.

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

SizzleBuzz

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Stuart Smith said:

I think it may depend a lot on which teams feel they won’t lose half their fan base if they sign him.

So which markets are comprised of low-IQ/no-morals fans?  Philly?  Chicago?  Charlotte?!?

 

6 minutes ago, Stuart Smith said:

It will be in Watson’s and Houston’s interest to resolve this before the NFL draft.

This is exactly what was said at this exact same time, last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, t96 said:

Yeah if he gets cleared legally we need to get him. Hell even if that stuff is still pending I’d trade for him with conditions based around his playing time (I.e. 2nd rounders that become 1st rounders if he plays x number of games each year).

I don't know that I want a desperate coach/GM trading for Deshaun Watson. Especially with a GM that traded what we did for Darnold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BurnNChinn Grand Master

BurnNChinn

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, SizzleBuzz said:

So which markets are comprised of low-IQ/no-morals fans?  Philly?  Chicago?  Charlotte?!?

 

This is exactly what was said at this exact same time, last year.

Your dumb as fug if u think Texans will not trade him this year. With him set to make 35 mil, he will be traded. They won’t sit him and pay him that lol. How dumb are you really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRumGone Grand Master

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Ricky Spanish said:

A few things though:

a) I doubt he would actually waive his no trade clause for us

b) We can't afford his contract

c) If we somehow got him and afforded his contract, we wouldn't be able to field a competitive team with him

d) He's an accused rapist who has not settled his legal disputes

Nothing about trading for Watson makes sense. 

The only point that concerns me is the last one. If his legal stuff is straightened out the rest are irrelevant. He apparently didn’t waive his trade clause to us because of Miami. He wanted to go there and that’s not happening anymore. 
 

point b is nonsense you can make the contract work for next year. As far as c we absolutely could field a competitive team and this isn’t just about next year. It’s about the next decade plus. 3 firsts is actually 2 because deshaun would be our pick at #6 this draft. You’d be getting a known 25 year old elite franchise qb. Wouldn’t be us gambling on an unknown qb in the draft because dw already is a known. 
 

the debate shouldn’t be about it making sense. It does make sense. The debate should be if this path is better than another path. Do we have a better chance at building up the team and securing a legit elite qb within the next five years or do we have a better chance with deshaun without two first round picks in that same time frame of five years? 

 

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

    • kungfoodude
      You know what's worse about the QB situation?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      I liked Sanders field reading abilities in general but his ceiling is fairly low and his shenanigans as a pro are, quite frankly, bizarre.  I don't think he is doing himself any favors by being a distraction while also being buried on the depth chart. Don't get me wrong, the media would attempt to make him a distraction regardless but it's not smart to feed into it when you aren't having a role at all. This can also be said of XL, BTW. We are no stranger to this. It's a lot easier to excuse Cam dressing like a deleted scene Harry Potter character at press conferences when he is looking like a man among boys on the football field. 
    • TD alt
      You know what's worse about the QB situation?

      By TD alt · Posted

      I hear Huddlers throwing things similar about Sanders whenever his name comes up, but to put it bluntly, we don't know that to be true. What we do know is that plenty of Browns fans thought that Sanders had the best camp out of the bunch, notwithstanding not being given the opportunity to play with the ones. What has been reported is that Dillon Gabriel is Stefanski's guy, and Andrew Berry thought that Sanders should be prioritized (even if it meant that he would eventually trade Sanders due to Sanders having more value). The fact that many Browns fans preferred (and prefer now) Sanders, and that there was a split---or difference of opinion between Stefanski and Berry, isn't really up for debate. It's true.  What this all means, at the end of the day, is that we don't know how Sanders compares to Hooker or anyone else because he really hasn't had an opportunity to play for whatever reasons. 
    • kungfoodude
      You know what's worse about the QB situation?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      I don't think with a roster this bad we should be spamming picks at subpar QB's for development purposes. When the roster is a little more fleshed out, I would fully support that. Also, with our persistent evaluation problems, I can only imagine who we would have likely overdrafted in the past few years.
×
×
  • Create New...