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!

     

The last 7 SuperBowl Champions

ncfan

By ncfan,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Captroop Grand Master

Captroop

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, PantherKyle said:

Outside of Foles wonky run (following up an MVP season from Wentz, however), you NEED a franchise QB. It's how you win. This isn't 1998.

 

TRADE UP.

Why trade up? None of those teams had a QB they took with a top 5 pick.

I agree with the premise we have to find a franchise QB. But the lesson from that list is you either 1) Trade for a proven star or 2) get lucky with your pick. Hell, even Mahomes could have been gotten with the #9 pick.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cdparr7 Grand Master

Cdparr7

Posted
Posted

That’s because the defense gets shafted every year and there is a new rule that benefits the offense each season (as stated by Tepper).

 

Want to make things fair? Get rid of offensive and defensive holding. Keep Roughing the Passer and Pass Interference. 
 

Defensive gets to hold these whiny receivers and OL gets to grab pass rushers.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Captroop said:

Why trade up? None of those teams had a QB they took with a top 5 pick.

I agree with the premise we have to find a franchise QB. But the lesson from that list is you either 1) Trade for a proven star or 2) get lucky with your pick. Hell, even Mahomes could have been gotten with the #9 pick.

You are right.  We do not need to trade up.  Lets just keep our picks and see how things unfold  in real time

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokinwithWilly Grand Master

SmokinwithWilly

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Captroop said:

Why trade up? None of those teams had a QB they took with a top 5 pick.

I agree with the premise we have to find a franchise QB. But the lesson from that list is you either 1) Trade for a proven star or 2) get lucky with your pick. Hell, even Mahomes could have been gotten with the #9 pick.

The only reason IMO to trade up is you've done all you're scouting and there is one guy that is head and shoulders above everyone else in your book. If it's 50/50 between 2 guys, no need to move unless you're pretty sure they're going to go before your pick. I don't think you move unless you're sure of the skill level of the player you're drafting. 

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

Captroop

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

The only reason IMO to trade up is you've done all you're scouting and there is one guy that is head and shoulders above everyone else in your book. If it's 50/50 between 2 guys, no need to move unless you're pretty sure they're going to go before your pick. I don't think you move unless you're sure of the skill level of the player you're drafting. 

I'll be really interested to see what happens.

I will say, and it's a huge caveat to my opinion on this matter, IF we trade up, I'll be very excited. Because if our offensive-minded coach, and our new QB coach see someone they like enough to make that move, it's something to be be thrilled about. This is a new coach and a new regime. If Rhule had done it, I'd hate it, because it would be a move of desperation trying to hit on something, ANYTHING to save his job. And if it didn't work out, the picks he traded away wouldn't matter because he wouldn't be around next season anyway. 

But Frank Reich coming in, he doesn't need to prove anything right away, and losing future picks on a QB who busts would haunt him the rest of his tenure. So if this regime makes the move, it betrays a confidence and certainty in the guy they're going after that any fan would be a fool not to celebrate.

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

CPantherKing

Posted
Posted

And then you realize in 2017 the 2022 lowest ranked #16 Chiefs D would be ranked top 10 next to the highest ranked #4 Eagles D.

Rankings and points scored is relative to the field - not to seasons. Rank every team together over the past 7 seasons, then we'll talk.

The defense that gets a top NFL offense to make the most mistakes wins. The offensive game has changed, but the better defense still wins 🏆.  We'd be having 60 and 70 point games if offense won championships. This isn't college.

Turnovers, pressures, QB ToP, and field position are more important to me than yards and fractions of points.

Give me a defense that averages 3 scores or fewer per game and an offense that averages 4 scores or more per game. Rankings don't matter. One year they will be top 10 and the next they will be middle of the pack.

Let's remember the Chiefs don't win the SB without a defensive TD and the defense flipping the field with a 3 and out in the 4th quarter to set up the offense.

Awarding the offense for those defensive points?

  • Flames 1
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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...