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!

     

Justin Fields 61 yard rushing touchdown


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

The QBs I seek

Staubach

Russ

Big Ben

Manning

Warren Moon

Fouts

Young

Montana 

 

And on and on and on would all still be franchise guys today.

 

I'll take prime Russ Moon lamar and Mahomes over Cam any day of the week.

The number one measurement of a QB is arm and passing ability. Plain and simple.

Allen can throw

Cousins can throw

Russ traditionally can throw

Brady can throw 

Lamar can throw

Rogers can throw

Herbert Burrows can throw.

 

I want a guy that can dice you up.

Not some jag that can kinda get it in the vicinity. 

Fields is more vicinity than surgical 

lol your entire dumb argument is predicated on whether individual players are good or not, you’re only retroactively applying a pointless distinction on them to make it look like you’ve got deep insight despite being the worst poster here

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of us knew that Fields would forever be brought up in this forum when we skipped over him. I said it in so many words around that time. Just because Rhule is gone doesn't give us that short of a memory.

Fields will always be the guy that we fuged up on if he turns out to be a legit franchise QB. He's on his way notwithstanding extremely fuged up circumstances. Just deal with it as a part of life as a Panthers fan.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

Mills has played 21 games, Fields 20

 

And Fields had Mooney, Robinson, Kmet, Montgomery and Herbert. 
 

You are bragging about 3 wins lol, that just goes to show how bad both QBs are.

Yeah and for several of those “20” games Fields played he was pulled and came in for Dalton. Nagy was swapping QBs left and right last year. This is why it makes sense to compare this year where both QBs have been starters since week 1 and have been getting starter reps all year. That would however derail your whole argument, so I get why you are against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

You said Allen wasn’t a dual threat QB. I never trusted your QB judgement again after that…

so like youre not smart enough to understand the formula but if player good=mobile and if player bad=dual threat

bare in mind he used to consider the two to be one in the same and the argument was “QBs that run don’t win Super Bowls” but it’s hard to prop that argument up when you’ve got Russell Wilson running for 500+ yards en route to a Lombardi blowout over pocket guy extraordinare Peyton manning

from there it morphed into this insane reclassification of dividing good players from bad players into his pointless titles

Edited by Growl
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GoobyPls said:

No we are not, I was talking about the 2021 class in totality. 
 

The fact is 3 weeks ago Fields was far and away the worst QB in the class and 3 weeks of decent football isn’t gonna change my perspective.

  Maybe you were but you made no mention of it. Use whatever helps you out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

He's mobile because he has an elite arm.

Mobile > dual threat

He had to get his TDs with his legs today. 86 rushing yards and 2 rushing TDs with 0 passing TDs and 1 INT. He is about as dual threat as it gets. They incorporate QB runs all in that offense. He had 9 attempts which is more than any of his RBs.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Growl said:

lol your entire dumb argument is predicated on whether individual players are good or not, you’re only retroactively applying a pointless distinction on them to make it look like you’ve got deep insight despite being the worst poster here

Throwing will always be the most important trait. The further down the line your QBs arm is the further from the Superbowl you get.

I've said it a million times I'll take tons of QBs over Cam that played in the league while he did if we are judging their prime vs his.

Russ Breese Ben Brady Payton Elway Allen Burrow Rivers Watson Luck Stafford Mahomes do I need to keep going?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Growl said:

lol your entire dumb argument is predicated on whether individual players are good or not, you’re only retroactively applying a pointless distinction on them to make it look like you’ve got deep insight despite being the worst poster here

That list is insane lol. Just a bunch of names

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Growl said:

so like youre not smart enough to understand the formula but if player good=mobile and if player bad=dual threat

bare in mind he used to consider the two to be one in the same and the argument was “QBs that run don’t win Super Bowls” but it’s hard to prop that argument up when you’ve got Russell Wilson running for 500+ yards en route to a Lombardi blowout over pocket guy extraordinare Peyton manning

from there it morphed into this insane reclassification of dividing good players from bad players into his pointless titles

I never considered it one in the same.

I've always distinguished mobile from dual threat from running qbs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

He had to get his TDs with his legs today. 86 rushing yards and 2 rushing TDs with 0 passing TDs and 1 INT. He is about as dual threat as it gets. They incorporate QB runs all in that offense. He had 9 attempts which is more than any of his RBs.

You talking about Allen?

That's why he lost. He just said he didn't play QB well enough today to win.

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...