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

    • Joe Bear
      2026 World Cup Thread

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • rebelrouser
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By rebelrouser · Posted

      Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...