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!

     

We pretty much have to take a RB on day 2 in the draft, right?

t96

By t96,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

scratched Proficient

scratched

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

All of them are light years below Cmac.

 

You dump a star you have to replace him with a star or you go backwards 

CMC has 3 to 4 years left. It will take us 2 to 3 to get to a playoff caliber team. No need in paying him and him helping us for 1 year. The only people who don't like the trade are on this message board. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
stan786 Mentor

stan786

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

Yea I agree. But the Giants, Cowboys and Chiefs are all winning right now with first round RBs. No single position is REQUIRED to win except QB, but the more weapons you give your QB the better he’ll look. 

Id agree though I think the chiefs are doing it in spite of their RB.  Giants are 100% overachieving thanks to Barkley and some really good coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

Yea I agree. But the Giants, Cowboys and Chiefs are all winning right now with first round RBs. No single position is REQUIRED to win except QB, but the more weapons you give your QB the better he’ll look. 

Another stupid take:

The bills, jets, ravens, bengals, ravens, Colts, chargers, niners and falcons to name a few are all winning without first round rbs

 

Also the giants and cowboys are about to part ways with their first round running backs

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

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Anyone that thinks he's easily replaced is insane. 

The point is we don’t have to. We’re about to get a very talented qb that we need to build around. Don’t take a rb until 4th round or later. Take positions of better value in the second or third rounds like te, lineman or wr. Build this team the correct way. 
 

it is so weird reading some of these posts. It’s like some people don’t  watch how other successful teams are built.

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jmac Grand Master

Jmac

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, lightsout said:

I think Foreman could legitimately hold down the position for another year if need be, provided he protects the ball. He's a 4 ypc back I think, will never be a guy teams fear but he will do what we need him to do, which is be steady. No need to reach for a RB unless there's a can't-miss guy there.

If he can replace Henry when he was hurt, why not productive here?

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

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

Another stupid take:

The bills, jets, ravens, bengals, ravens, Colts, chargers, niners and falcons to name a few are all winning without first round rbs

Colts, ravens, niners and falcons are winning? And I never said you need one to win, I was arguing against the idea that teams that win don’t have first round RBs.  I showed that there are teams that are indeed winning with first round RBs.  Of course you can win without one, there’s plenty of teams winning by your definition without a first round QB, doesn’t mean it isn’t better to have one. Talk about a stupid take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

Colts, ravens, niners and falcons are winning? And I never said you need one to win, I was arguing against the idea that teams that win don’t have first round RBs.  I showed that there are teams that are indeed winning with first round RBs.  Of course you can win without one, there’s plenty of teams winning by your definition without a first round QB, doesn’t mean it isn’t better to have one. Talk about a stupid take. 

2nd in their division just like the giants and Cowboys (3rd).  So according to you winning

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

    • panfanman
      Newest member of our household Pride

      By panfanman · Posted

      I'm gonna be a grandpa!  My 2 year old son sat on my lap Panther's inaugural season in Clemson.  Die hard fans ever since.  Now he's going to be a daddy and sharing the fan tradition with a custom made shirt.  Check out the little fella in the sonogram (look closely).
    • Basbear
      Top 5 draft targets for positions of need

      By Basbear · Posted

      Watch out now...... I agree but many others disagree with this line of thinking.  I seen a recent summary too- Which would you rather have the best safety or the 8th best edge? Best safety maybe kyle hamilton, the 8th best edge is Maxx Crosby. Id take maxx even with Myles or TJ on the roster. Plus if you don't like Maxx as 8th best, Id take whoever the 8th best edge is over the Kyle.  Panthers need a starter level edge, the only realistic shot is using the 1st rounder. But if somehow a stud LT pulls out a gas mask and falls to 19, draft them if much higher ranked.  The funny deal is those teams drafting in the late portion of drafts don't need edge, QB, WR, or OT..... I wonder why?!??? hmmmmmmm.... plus it pays off for them, cause they do need OG, ILB, TE, safety..... and now they get a top level player to remain great....
    • WUnderhill
      A pretty insane QB stat

      By WUnderhill · Posted

      Wrong conclusion. FOs should look at this and say “What can I do to better set up my top pick to succeed?” Not say welp I guess I just shouldn’t draft the most talented player at the most important position. It’s like saying the Cavaliers shouldn’t have drafted Lebron because they did a poor job building around him and he didn’t start winning championships until he left. It’s silly. Should teams also look and say “wow look at all these super bowls won by QBs drafted in the 5th round, guess that’s the best round to draft a QB.” Nonsense.
×
×
  • Create New...