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

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

UNCrules2187 Mentor

UNCrules2187

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

No team in their right mind would give a single first for CMC. The production isn't there this year because of the offensive woes and wasn't there the last couple years because of season ending injures.

The production isn't there this year? I mean he's on pace for 1,900 total yards playing in one of the worst offenses we've seen in years.

Edited by UNCrules2187
  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayboogieman Grand Master

jayboogieman

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

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

There are other RBs out there with similar skillsets that while not as good, could probably be had for less.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UNCrules2187 Mentor

UNCrules2187

Posted
Posted (edited)

  

8 minutes ago, therealmjl said:

Cam Erving

hahahahahaa

 

5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Hey, we got returns for Greg Little and Dennis Daley.

 

I actually think Cam Erving is a decent candidate to get dealt. Lots of tackle injuries out there, I can definitely see a team like the Broncos or Rams sending a 5th or 6th round pick for him.

Edited by UNCrules2187
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Minnesota?  they are 5-1. Add CMC with Cook and Jefferson.  That would be nasty. 

Ask yourself this.  If your were a bills fan would you be banging the table for the team to send a first to get cmac? 

 

My answer:  hell fug yes I would. I think that is what we probably see in the next couple weeks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peon Awesome Experienced

Peon Awesome

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

No team in their right mind would give a single first for CMC. The production isn't there this year because of the offensive woes and wasn't there the last couple years because of season ending injures.

McCaffrey is 4th in the NFL in yards from scrimmage, only behind Saquon, Tyreek Hill and Nick Chubb. That's with him operating within the worst offense in the NFL. I hardly think people will look at that and scoff at the lack of production

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadianCat Veteran

CanadianCat

Posted
Posted

We are going to draft a rookie QB next year. 

CMC is THE BEST player to pair with a developing QB. On top of that his dead cap is nasty. 

 

Honestly our best player to trade for the biggest return is Burns. Which would make sense as we need to redo his contract this offseason.

 

That said, my head is still in the sand... I still think we are a coach and a half decent QB away from being able to compete. LFG!!!

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayboogieman Grand Master

jayboogieman

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, UNCrules2187 said:

The production isn't here this year? I mean he's on pace for 1,900 total yards playing in one of the worst offenses we've seen in years.

"On pace" doesn't matter since injures, changes to the scheme, etc can change that.

There are a dozen guys with more production running and one of them is a QB. Some of them have less attempts with more yards. He's done better catching the ball than other RBs, but that's because he's been used more that way than most other RBs.

So yeah, I would say the production is not there to warrant a first or more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CanadianCat said:

We are going to draft a rookie QB next year. 

CMC is THE BEST player to pair with a developing QB. On top of that his dead cap is nasty. 

 

Honestly our best player to trade for the biggest return is Burns. Which would make sense as we need to redo his contract this offseason.

 

That said, my head is still in the sand... I still think we are a coach and a half decent QB away from being able to compete. LFG!!!

So cmc is going to be cool just hanging around a poo team just to make it easier on our rookie qb?  We are 2 years minimum best case scenario for playoffs.  Lets do the right thing and send him to a winner now and get a pick or 2 for him.  By the time we make the playoffs you really think he is going to be productive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UNCrules2187 Mentor

UNCrules2187

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

"On pace" doesn't matter since injures, changes to the scheme, etc can change that.

There are a dozen guys with more production running and one of them is a QB. Some of them have less attempts with more yards. He's done better catching the ball than other RBs, but that's because he's been used more that way than most other RBs.

So yeah, I would say the production is not there to warrant a first or more.

You say he's done better catching the ball because he's "used more that way" but conveniently leave out that "of the dozen guys with more production running" 8 of those 12 have more carries than he does. Feels like you're cherry picking stats to support your point. You didn't care to respond to the earlier post showing he's 4th in total scrimmage yards so far this year either.

Edited by UNCrules2187
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UNCrules2187 Mentor

UNCrules2187

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

So cmc is going to be cool just hanging around a poo team just to make it easier on our rookie qb?  We are 2 years minimum best case scenario for playoffs.  Lets do the right thing and send him to a winner now and get a pick or 2 for him.  By the time we make the playoffs you really think he is going to be productive?

Well considering he's only 26 years old and barely has any wear on him for the past two years, yeah I think he will be productive when we're back in the playoffs. As teams like the Giants and Dolphins are showing, all you need is the right combination of coaching staff and decent QB play to be one year away from playoff contention.  

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peon Awesome Experienced

Peon Awesome

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, 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.

The Chiefs used their 2020 1st round pick on Clyde Edwards-Helaire. You think that's a smarter move than even a 1 year rental on McCaffrey for close to league minimum salary? They would easily be the super bowl favorite. Honestly it's a down year for the NFL as a whole and Kansas City and Buffalo seem like the only 2 teams with any legit shot at the Super Bowl. You can give up pick 32 for McCaffrey and nearly guarantee your super bowl win, or you can sit on your thumbs, hope for the best and try to draft another Clyde Edwards-Helaire with that precious pick you were just too damn smart to give up.

I don't doubt for one second that KC and Buffalo would happily get on the phone with Fitterer if their 1st round pick was enough for the Panthers. I just think the team is genuine that it's not and I don't blame them. The last pick of the 1st round is not going to help a rookie qb and the team as a whole more than McCaffrey will. 

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

We are 2 years minimum best case scenario for playoffs.

Do not agree with this at all.  (I can't believe I am saying this) We have a good offensive line, CMC and some decent WRs.  We have a top 10 defense, if they weren't on the field so much. 

You bring in a good HC with an innovated offense, a QB that at minimum, can manage the offense.  A defensive coordinator that can utilize the good players we have.  It's not impossible to turn this around in one off-season.   

A prime example is the NY Giants. Brian Daboll has this team playing great football.  They are fighting to the end and are winning.  Last year they were as bad as we were.  This year they are in the position to get a wildcard and depending on how the remainder of the season goes.  They could win their division. 

 

  • Beer 1
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

    • csx
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By csx · Posted

      Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • kungfoodude
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control  Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst roster in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most voliate franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete diaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
    • Tr3ach
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By Tr3ach · Posted

      I think he has started to build a culture here.  I think if we had a qb with no limitations we would be seeing a lot more with the offense.  I think most of the coaches that come in and instantly win went to teams that were underachieving previously based on roster talent level.  Based on our roster talent,  we werent underachieving,  we were just bad.
×
×
  • Create New...