The Carolina Panthers are Idiots

[hepcat]

1 hour ago, ncsfinest21 said:

I said soooo many times I wanted Micah Parsons. I felt he would be the next Luke for us. 

Parsons is nuts. He’s better than I imagined he would be. Single handedly turned that Dallas defense around. 

[jayboogieman]

1 hour ago, Jon Snow said:

Anytime you can trade a LB for 2 1sts and a 2nd you do that without hesitation. 

We need DE's, true DE's. Not 3-4 outside linebackers. 

I don't think Burns would be a good 3-4 OLB either. He can't cover nor does he play the run well. He's strictly a pass rusher.

[JawnyBlaze]

5 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Miami says "whats up"

So do the Browns of the past infinity years

[KatsAzz]

6 hours ago, PghPanther said:

Hmmm!!! Looks like the Panthers are having kicker tryouts after all.

[mc52beast]

Staring at the sun will harm your eyes 

[Jon Snow]

52 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

I don't think Burns would be a good 3-4 OLB either. He can't cover nor does he play the run well. He's strictly a pass rusher.

That's how the Panthers use him and you see how well that's going.  He's a LB and no amount of hope and hype is going to change that. If the FO pays Burns like a DE then every single person involved with that decision should be fired.

[Peon Awesome]

5 hours ago, Tr3ach said:

Burns definitely should have been traded for 2 firsts and a second.  I dont see how anyone could think differently.   Hes about to have to sign a new contract off of his rookie deal and he is a specialized player.  He is a speed rusher that can get picked on in the run game and misses sack sometimes because he can be a one direction rusher.   Rejecting the Burns deal is one of the worst moves the franchise has made in recent years personally and it still aggravates me every time I think about it.  I could see arguments made on both sides about moving Moore for a first.  I also think he is a specialized player that is more of a great #2 than a true #1.  A true #1 doesnt have some effort concerns and can get open by running really good routes alone, not by being schemed open mostly.   I love Moore but with a strong WR class I would have probably took that deal too but that one is more debatable.  Like I said he is a really good if not elite #2 with the right coaches.

Let me help you see it in another light. The draft picks were for 2024 and 2025 picks. Bradley Chubb went for a 1st and 4th at the deadline on his 5th year option. You don't think we'd get close to 2 1sts next year if Burns doesn't make sense at that point? We'll still get a 2024 and 2025 1st, but this way we have a chance to see whether a promising rookie qb and a competent coaching staff can lead to a quick turnaround first. Trade Burns for a 2024 and 2025 pick now and you're pretty much accepting we're not competing till 2025.

Also immediate impact pass rushers are rarely found outside of the top 10. For every Maxx Crosby there are 10 Yetur Gross Matos. There's a reason teams are offering so much for Burns. Now if we're in a full on rebuild and don't want to pay Burns like a premium pass rusher, fine, trade him next year. But I have no problem nixing a trade that doesn't help us for a couple years when we have Burns at a reasonable price through 2023.

[Tr3ach]

15 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Let me help you see it in another light. The draft picks were for 2024 and 2025 picks. Bradley Chubb went for a 1st and 4th at the deadline on his 5th year option. You don't think we'd get close to 2 1sts next year if Burns doesn't make sense at that point? We'll still get a 2024 and 2025 1st, but this way we have a chance to see whether a promising rookie qb and a competent coaching staff can lead to a quick turnaround first. Trade Burns for a 2024 and 2025 pick now and you're pretty much accepting we're not competing till 2025.

Also immediate impact pass rushers are rarely found outside of the top 10. For every Maxx Crosby there are 10 Yetur Gross Matos. There's a reason teams are offering so much for Burns. Now if we're in a full on rebuild and don't want to pay Burns like a premium pass rusher, fine, trade him next year. But I have no problem nixing a trade that doesn't help us for a couple years when we have Burns at a reasonable price through 2023.

Ok then, say we get a qb and a good coach this year and we start competing.  You can trade some of those extra draft picks for players then.

[Knaakedup]

3 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

That's how the Panthers use him and you see how well that's going.  He's a LB and no amount of hope and hype is going to change that. If the FO pays Burns like a DE then every single person involved with that decision should be fired.

I might be wrong here, but didn't we also draft him around the time we were toying with the idea of switching to a 3-4??

[top dawg]

10 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

Anytime you can trade a LB for 2 1sts and a 2nd you do that without hesitation. 

We need DE's, true DE's. Not 3-4 outside linebackers. 

 

10 hours ago, Knaakedup said:

Been saying this since last year. He’s going to mess his career up by not getting with a team that’s running a 3-4. He’s not cut out for the Peppers/Rucker role we want him to be. 

This is what people don't get. They're arguing about "young talent" [blah blah blah], but he has never been the right fit for a 4-3 (or a Snow 5-1 or whatever). He is a 3-4 LB playing out of position. 

 

Let me tell y'all a story:

I was so peeved with Yahoo Fantasy Football for listing Burns as an LB. I wrote to them (tweeted at them and everything) a couple of seasons ago and argued that he should get a dual designation of "DE, LB" because though they listed him as an LB, the Panthers had him listed officially as a DE. They would not budge (though this year they have him listed as a DE). I thought about it, and just dropped him altogether, because he wasn't anywhere as consistent as top LBs, and he wasn't as consistent as top DEs either. Hell, even the top DTs outscore him (I have Quinnen Williams). Burns might be a sufficient BYE week replacement.

The point is is that he's a tweener. He would be much more effective as a pass rushing, 3-4 LB. We aren't maximizing his effectiveness or potential because that's not our preferred system. 

 

This is the real reason why we should have traded him for that type of haul.

Edited November 8, 2022 by top dawg

[shaqattaq]

On 11/7/2022 at 2:49 PM, TheCasillas said:

I dont understand the concept of "Trade 2 first round talents who are established in the league for 3 first round picks." 

Trading DJ would kill our cap situation and give us 20million in total dead cap. Trading Burns creates a huge hole on the roster. 

I agree, BUT...

Burns is a very, very good player, but I would have a lot of trouble turning down 2 rd 1 picks and a 2nd for him. very very good DE's get very very big contracts. I think he can be replaced by a rookie, even if we bundle a few picks to move earlier into the first to pick him. And that would leave us on a 5 year cheap deal with extra picks. I loves me some Burns, but that's a lot to turn down.

Who ever is QB next year will need DJ, and his contract is doable. We would have been idiots to trade him.

[YourLastThought]

I would have traded him for that haul in a second. He will come due to be paid and we are going to have to WAY overpay him more than he is worth to keep him at which time we may then decide to let him walk and we get nothing. He is simply not worth one of the highest paid DE salaries in the league simple as that. Unless he comes out next year setting record sacks but I think we all know he is not going to do that.

[Carl Spackler]

Meh, that Burns money would’ve just gone to more Pat Elfleins and Cam Ervings. 

[Day1PanthersFan]

Panthers fans knew this when our new owner hired a mediocre college coach 

There are high school teams more organized