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!

     

Why the Panthers NEED Sean Payton..


micnificent28
 Share

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, 4Corners said:

Agree. I think he would prefer Dallas but unless there is just a monumental collapse in D I don’t think they will fire fat Mike. I think he said the Chargers and the Cardinals? Kingsbury is a dead man walking. Sounds like he wants to get out west on some year round nice weather. 

I think it will be the chargers. Easier QB to work with. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, X-Clown said:

This is actually a really horrible reason to want Peyton. If you want someone to pick a running back too high in the draft, you can call hurney or gettleman and I’m sure they’ll come back.

This was a different time in the NFL. Running backs were very utilized then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Car123 said:

Yes, in hindsight. At the time, he was considered the consensus #1

And? There were so many better options that were available, both at his position and at others. He's a great coach, but call it what it was, overdrafting of a great college player that turned out be a disappointing pro given where he was drafted. 

Edited by X-Clown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Snake said:

I think you're pretty safe. No way NO let's him in their division. Payton is going to make Herbert a HOF QB though. 

I'm not saying this to you specifically, but I see this argument all the time about teams not wanting to trade within their division and I really don't understand it.  No team makes a trade they think they are losing out on, within the division or otherwise.  Either you think it's fair and balanced or you think you're getting the better end of it.  Trades are simply an exchange of assets and if you think you're getting more valuable assets from your trade partner than what you're giving up, then wouldn't you be more inclined to trade within the division and essentially "screw over" a rival?  If I'm the Saints, I'd love to take two of the Panthers' 1st round picks off their hands unless I actually think Payton is worth more than that.  In which case, I wouldn't trade him to any team for the same reason.

Like what is the unique logic applied to trading within your division that doesn't apply to trading outside of the division?  Is it something to do with said player/coach having inside knowledge?  Cause you could more-or-less get the same thing from signing some Practice Squad guy or some vet FA bum who previously played for that team.  Is it because that player/coach is gonna get some kind of motivational boost to try and stick it to their previous team?

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

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...