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

OnlyPantherFaninMaine

By OnlyPantherFaninMaine,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, OnlyPantherFaninMaine said:

Wanna know something scarier than Halloween? This pass rush and defense without Brian Burns. 

We were able to rent a better pass rusher last season.  

I want a legit rebuild.  And that starts on offense.  It's an offensive league.  Get a QB.  Get him crazy weapons.  Once you have that, you can put together a defense good enough to contend IMO.  Because it doesn't have to be a great D if you have a great O. 

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

CRA

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SetfreexX said:

Not about being on a run, you don't trade our best defensive player for picks 2 and 3 years away, that is foolish and short-sighted. 

If it was a 22', and 23' plus ''sweeteners'' you could consider it, but to trade one of the better young pass rushers for picks 2 and 3 years away is some Madden type non-sense.  

Burns is by default the best players because we don't have a dominant defensive player though. 

Make a list of great defensive players Carolina has had.  Where is Burns. 

  • Pie 3
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Panther'sBigD Mentor

Panther'sBigD

Posted
Posted
Just now, CRA said:

We were able to rent a better pass rusher last season.  

I want a legit rebuild.  And that starts on offense.  It's an offensive league.  Get a QB.  Get him crazy weapons.  Once you have that, you can put together a defense good enough to contend IMO.  Because it doesn't have to be a great D if you have a great O. 

"Blow the team up, get a QB and give him crazy weapons! It's as simple as that!" LMAO You guys play too much Madden. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joemac Grand Master

joemac

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, SetfreexX said:

You don't take future 1sts in 24, and 25 for a Star caliber player that is ascending. Some of ya'll make no sense at all pass rush is a PREMIUM it's why they're willing to part with the 1st's in the first place. 

If you are gonna even consider the trade it can't be from a team that is likely to make the playoffs both of those seasons. Then you're trading our best pass rusher for some guys in the mid 20's....

You can trade a CMC, as paying a running back 19M-21M on avg is INSANE. That money, or that caliber of money is reserved for PREMIUM positions. 

QB / T / EDGE / WR / DB

 

The only problem with that is, that no team not in the playoff/Super Bowl picture is going to part with 2 future 1sts, because they are also rebuilding.  It would have to be a contender to make this type of deal, because those are the teams who feel they are one piece like Burns away from winning it all. 

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

pantherj

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SetfreexX said:

Not about being on a run, you don't trade our best defensive player for picks 2 and 3 years away, that is foolish and short-sighted. 

If it was a 22', and 23' plus ''sweeteners'' you could consider it, but to trade one of the better young pass rushers for picks 2 and 3 years away is some Madden type non-sense.  

You have to think about the time frame for when we'll have a franchise QB with experience. That is the opposite of short sighted. This season is lost. Next season, even if we draft a rookie QB, is lost. Guess what comes after that?

I would trade him in a heartbeat.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OnlyPantherFaninMaine Community Regular

OnlyPantherFaninMaine

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, CRA said:

We were able to rent a better pass rusher last season.  

I want a legit rebuild.  And that starts on offense.  It's an offensive league.  Get a QB.  Get him crazy weapons.  Once you have that, you can put together a defense good enough to contend IMO.  Because it doesn't have to be a great D if you have a great O. 

By declining this trade it indicates Fitterer, Morgan, and Co. feel this team doesn’t need a full rebuild. This division will be up for grabs starting this year and well beyond because nobody has their QB of the future. I don’t want to waste years attempting a rebuild when we could be competing in the NFC with a great young QB and the right coaching hire. 
 

If you trade Burns now you may as well trade Moore, Chinn, Brown as well. What message does that send the rest of the guys in that locker room? No star player here is going to willingly suffer through years of rebuilding. The much quicker, sustainable, and likely path to success of this team is nailing the QB selection and hiring the right coach. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...