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!

     

Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, NorthTryon said:

I'm not complaining, I just know how it is when you have someone too hype about NFL stuff and ultimately have no real say in how it goes. I'm excited for where the Panthers are headed. I am also realistic and also know how NFL teams operate. You don't trade character guys that are good in their prime as a starting point for whatever the plans are going forward. Just be open for debate when the trade doesn't happen. 

1.) You were complaining.

2.) I'll be hype whenever I feel like it.

3.) I have already made my case for trading Burns. We disagree.

4.) The odds are against us trading Burns because we already rejected the Rams first offer. That doesn't make you some sort of football guru if the Rams don't come up with a better offer. Good lord dude.

Edited by pantherj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FugginPoo said:

The Super Bowl champs don’t value draft picks

McVay doesn’t value them. He’s already flirted with hanging up his coaching shoes for a broadcast gig. 
 

these first rounders could very easily turn into top ten picks two years from now once Stafford declines and McVay bolts. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Ill post again. here you go:

Brian Burns with 9 games to go and Burns averaging .7 sacks per game, which would end him at 11.3 sacks on the year and a total of 37 sacks. Conservative estimate. 

image.png.8b8c08c480b5eca4f66c9baf62326468.png

Khalil Mack

40.5 total sacks his first 4 years. 

Game started difference is in Mack's favor heavily.... and games played will be one in BB's favor if he plays the rest of the year.

image.png.667af76049af449fe4a0c0ffa8f7a868.png

.7 sacks per game is below Greg Hardy production and far from being a top pass rusher.

.9 will always be the number.

Deacon Jones was 1.02 per game. Now that's domination. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pakmeng said:

Mack has a lot more tackles an tackles for loss

Burns is on pace to have almost 30 TFLs this season.. the trade for BB isnt for what he did his first two years, its what he is doing right now.... so that alone should be an offer similiar to Mack. The bar has been set.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

They are not even remotely close. 

 

1 minute ago, Catsfan69 said:

So do interceptions, pass defensed and forced fumbles.

I see a huge difference between Mack and Burns

Brian Burns only payed 43% of our snaps his rookie year...  Mack played 84% in his rookie year. Burns is getting better and better each year at a ridiculous rate. His TFL is top 5 in the NFL right now and on pace to be more than Mack has ever had. 

The reason we are standing pat and not agreeing to this 2 1sts is because Burns statistically worth more.  

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Initially, I wanted Stroud but I thought the trade up meant that, whoever they chose, it was for a reason.  There was no pressure to do anything for the entire scouting team to do other than investigate every aspect of the top 3 candidates.  Stroud had his question marks, and I think it is possible that he falters this year.  Bryce had a much worse situation here in Carolina because we neglected the OL, traded our #1 WR, did not pick WRs well in the draft, traded our pro bowl RB, and seem to disregard the TE position altogether.  Bozeman was not a good fit and we relied on an improved OL in 2022 to suggest that we were set there when we were far from it.  Fitterer had no vision, no grasp of talent, and everyone in the front office and on the coaching staff were pretending to be gurus.  Our coaching staff was a group of men earning a lifetime achievement paycheck.  It all goes back to the years of neglect for the OL.  My theory?  If Stroud had come to Carolina, he would be as mocked and ridiculed as Bryce Young.   No, he does not have a cannon.  Chad Pennington was a weak-armed QB who had success and would have been even better if it were not for injuries.  Smarts is important at QB, and so are mechanics.  Before you can address Young's mechanics, he needs an OL, Running game, and weapons. We were not really able to run play action from under center for a few reasons--play action is not effective when you have to pass the ball--other than that, the QB must turn his back to the LOS for about 1.5 seconds.  When the QB has less than 2.5 seconds to pass the ball, that eliminates that part of the play book.  Heck, even the run option is minimized when there is immediate facial pressure.  SO those who want to talk about happy feet, bouncing, etc--they are symptoms of the problem, not the problem.  A weak arm?  Well, Young's arm is between Chad Pennington and Joe Montana--closer to Joe.  His are is not as weak as some think--but he has issues with the deep ball. When you are reacting to the defense and quickly have to pass, then that takes away the strength because you don't have the base to get power behind it.  I still wish we had taken Stroud, but we have Young and if you toss him out before giving him support, you are not wise, unsmart, not unfoolish, and rather elite in your failure to attain mediocrity.  Expect growth.  How much? Nobody knows.
    • Honestly, irrespective of Bryce, this is my hope for Canales. I hate hearing about him being a "QB whisperer." Because I don't give a rat's ass about him saving Bryce's career. Bryce either proves to be worth what we gave up for him, or it's next man up. I'm just excited to have a young, innovative offensive mind.
×
×
  • Create New...