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 won't face criminal charges


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

The good teams have more than just a franchise QB. They have good management, coaches, and scouts. They make smart trades and signings, treat the players well, and aren't afraid to cut or trade a guy that is getting long in the tooth. In short, successful teams are well run teams from the top down.

Giving up multiple picks can be smart when the team is entering their window to compete for a title. See the Chiefs and Rams for example. Giving up multiple picks out of desperation is stupid. See Washington with the RG3 trade or the Saints with the Ricky Williams trade for example.

Giving up multiple picks and young starting players is beyond stupid, especially when you won't have the cap space to sign quality free agents to replace those young starters. Bypassing better quality prospects for more later round picks as the Panthers did this past draft isn't the way to replace those starting caliber players either.

I get wanting to have a young, exciting, and dynamic young QB to cheer for, but selling the farm to acquire one is not the way when the team is in bad shape. I'm against selling out for this trade just as I was for trading up in the draft, the team just isn't ready to compete.

I’d agree with most of what you said, but do you really have confidence in this organization to build that way? Do you have confidence that they’ll build this team like that?
 

Hell, we’ve been trying to build the O-line for the better part of a decade. We’ve had top 10 picks 3 out of the last 5 years. 4 out of 6 if you count this year. All for what? Another 5 win season? 
 

As I stated before, Watson has 10+ years of prime football left. This team isn’t ready now and it won’t be ready for another 3 years with or without Watson. Why not get the franchise QB box marked off? Even if we make the best picks we possibly could the next 2/3 years, it won’t matter. 
 


 

 

Edited by SazmoRanger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SazmoRanger said:

I’d agree with most of what you said, but do you really have confidence in this organization to build that way? Do you have confidence that they’ll build this team like that?
 

Hell, we’ve been trying to build the O-line for the better part of a decade. We’ve had top 10 picks 3 out of the last 5 years. 4 out of 6 if you count this year. All for what? Another 5 win season? 
 

As I stated before, Watson has 10+ years of prime football left. This team isn’t ready now and it won’t be ready for another 3 years with or without Watson. Why not get the franchise QB box marked off? Even if we make the best picks we possibly could the next 2/3 years, it won’t matter. 
 


 

 

How do you know that? Cincinnati's roster was awful last year and I'd say they turned it around quick. They even still have some glaring holes. There are other examples as well.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all complained when we had cam that the team didn’t do enough to help him and his career was shortened because of injuries. Now some of you want us to give up at least 3 firsts and some good young players to get a franchise QB who isn’t as good as prime Cam. Seems like a repeat of bad history. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, amcoolio said:

How do you know that? Cincinnati's roster was awful last year and I'd say they turned it around quick. They even still have some glaring holes. There are other examples as well.

I’m talking about without a franchise QB. If you go back and look I actually used Cincy as an example of being irrelevant until Burrow. They have had top picks for YEARS. That didn’t matter until Burrow came around. 
 

Sure, it’s possible the Panthers could find a franchise QB sometime between now and 3 years, but our organization hasn’t shown it can scout the QB position and I don’t trust this organization when it comes to unproven QBs…. Call me crazy, but I don’t see any of these draft eligible QBs as game changers. 
 

  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jayboogieman said:

No, a franchise QB does not cure all ills.

  • Did having Cam fix the bad receivers and O-line he had for most of his time in Charlotte?
  • Did having Cam give the team back to back winning seasons?
  • Did having Cam give the Panthers more winning seasons than losing ones with him?
  • Did having Cam make Ron and Co better coaches?
  • Did having Cam make Hurney and Gettlemen better GMs?
  • Did having Cam win a Superbowl?

The answer to all of those questions is no.

We watched the movie where having a franchise QB and never puts a good team around him which results in being mediocre. I'm not interested in the remake where the bad team sells the farm for said QB and is unable to put a winning team around him because they don't have high draft picks to replace the young talent they gave away along with the picks themselves. Oh, nor do they have the cap space to afford good talent because of the QBs high cap hit along with the prior mistakes' cap hits.

The Bills are looking like a good team to follow about right now. I remember watching all 4 of the SB loses and feeling sorry for them after the second one. Then after the third it became pity.  Losing the fourth one took the soul out of them and they never recovered. It's amazing what a good coach can do.

We should've kept McDermott. 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crap.....I just thought of something. Rule is the best snake oil salesman in the league (the only thing he excels in) and Watson wants to talk to the coaches.

Its going to happen and we're going to be looking at the league from a big ol' hole in the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, amcoolio said:

How do you know that? Cincinnati's roster was awful last year and I'd say they turned it around quick. They even still have some glaring holes. There are other examples as well.

Aside from the pass protection and DB's they were pretty decent. Burrow and two good young WR's, Joe Mixon was pretty good. Imagine our coaches designing a 3/8 defensive scheme halftime adjustment to beat the Chiefs. We have pretty similar rosters minus the QB, add our coaching staff to their team and they definitely lose that Chiefs playoff game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, amcoolio said:

How do you know that? Cincinnati's roster was awful last year and I'd say they turned it around quick. They even still have some glaring holes. There are other examples as well.

They got their franchise QB and then used their first round pick to take Chase, who was an integral part of leading that team to the SB. If they had spent 3 1sts to acquire Burrow, there would have been no Chase and no SB trip. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jackie Lee said:

Aside from the pass protection and DB's they were pretty decent. Burrow and two good young WR's, Joe Mixon was pretty good. Imagine our coaches designing a 3/8 defensive scheme halftime adjustment to beat the Chiefs. We have pretty similar rosters minus the QB, add our coaching staff to their team and they definitely lose that Chiefs playoff game. 

Zac Taylor was considered really bad and on the hot seat to get fired before this season, almost exactly like Rhule

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...