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!

     

"Fire Sale" not happening


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

No matter what the pick is they are drafting a qb in the first come hell or high water.  Would be nice to have their pick of all of them but they are getting someone.  I thought up until yesterday we would be in the pick 5 range but after hearing Wilks say that Eason may be starting, Darnold not ready and baker not the starter even if healthy seems to me shenanigans are afoot and I like it

What about that golden lion??

cat yawn GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, UNCrules2187 said:

Echoed by Ben Allbright:

 

 

Nearly every source I've seen has said pretty much the same thing. They'll listen to offers like they always do, but they're not looking to unload a bunch of guys.

Wilks mentioned having discussed trade options with Fitterer and his presser.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

In the end this is what is going to happen I believe.  We are 2 years minimum out from competing, why put cmac through that when we can get resources from him and put him in a better situation?

If either of these teams were to get CMC they would immediately be favored to win the AFC.  The game the other day was one of the best games all season.  Fun to watch Mahomes and Allen battle it out. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t take less than a low first and second or mid first and third for CMC. We’re more than a year from competing if our new QB takes time to develop and we get an old school defensive HC. We get a bright HC that hits the ground running and our QB is ready to produce early like Cam was or Herbert or some of the other young QBs, we’re ready to compete immediately. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jayboogieman said:

Doubt it. Giving up first round picks for oft injured guys is a Panther move, not a move done by well run teams.

I agree but if you know its a later pick, and you know you are keeping him from another team and if you know he super charges an already super charged offense and he fits in your timeline for winning.  I can see a super bowl starved team doing it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

I wouldn’t take less than a low first and second or mid first and third for CMC. We’re more than a year from competing if our new QB takes time to develop and we get an old school defensive HC. We get a bright HC that hits the ground running and our QB is ready to produce early like Cam was or Herbert or some of the other young QBs, we’re ready to compete immediately. 

we are 2 years minimum from competing, thats best case scenario

  • Beer 2
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

    • Today, we are all Kucci... I miss our feral Russian attack goalie!
    • That was a good segment. Watched every minute of it and would highly recommend it to all fans.
    • "So much of what the Panthers are going to do next week isn't dictated by their preference, but by what happens above them. That's another benefit of not getting locked into need. For instance, if you're thinking you want a receiver, seeing five or six of them go off the board and reacting by taking the sixth or seventh off your list instead of the first (or second or third) something else isn't necessarily wise." https://www.panthers.com/news/ask-the-old-guy-back-into-the-weeds-of-the-nfl-draft-bryce-young-charlotte-hornets-mock-draft This is what some don't seem to get, I don't care how many times it is said: You're NOT going to draft an inferior person at one position, just because that position is perceived as, or is in fact, a bigger need. That would basically nullify, or at least lessen, the reason why you set yourself up via free agency to be able to take the BPA/BAP on the board in the first place.  Yes, the process is complex, very much involved and ongoing, but the overall philosophy is not rocket science. You set yourself up in order not to be pigeonholed into taking a lower graded player at the expense of a higher graded one. This is why Morgan, Gantt and countless of others say the same thing. This is why it's just nonsensical to set yourself in a position where you don't have to, but then act like you have to come hell or high water: "Oh, we have to draft [whatever position], and we can't draft [this position]."  I'm good with whatever they do, until proven otherwise, but even then, you have to be mature enough to know that drafting is an imperfect exercise, filled with hits and misses. And, you generally don't know if you've hit, and especially missed, right away. Moreover, like I've said before, sometimes two players--different positions or not--can both be hits on their respective teams, so in that sense, it's not purely about a right or wrong pick as much as it's about putting puzzle pieces together at the time the best way that you know how.  At the end of the day, people are going to believe what they want to believe, but one thing that's true is that what the Panthers do regarding the draft is dependent upon what others do, and what others do can and does change things. That being the case, it's just another reason why you can't go in with tunnel vision. The thought of doing that is preposterous.
×
×
  • Create New...