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!

     

PFF - What would it take for Panthers to trade up for #1 pick

TheSpecialJuan

By TheSpecialJuan,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheMaulClaw Mentor

TheMaulClaw

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Really because 2 in this draft were way better passer then Herbert in college… 

And If Physical talent is your point then Levi’s and Richardson are just as talented physically.. Ppl don’t remember Herbert was great at OU

Then just stay at 9 and draft Richardson.  Look I really want a QB now too, but at what cost?  People are acting like all we have to do is take a qb and we're ready to win the SB.  Trading 3 number 1's is the dumbest thing this franchise could ever do.  If we want to be Superbowl contenders then we should just trade back if our qb isn't there.  We could potentially have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds.  We grab our TE, DT, DE, and another WR. 

We go into next year with very little roster deficiencies with a ton of cap room, and potentially a top 15 pick. 

My point is, we need to have a roster strong enough to withstand 3 years without a 1st rounder before we make that kind of move.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WOW!! Grand Master

WOW!!

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, TheMaulClaw said:

Then just stay at 9 and draft Richardson.  Look I really want a QB now too, but at what cost?  People are acting like all we have to do is take a qb and we're ready to win the SB.  Trading 3 number 1's is the dumbest thing this franchise could ever do.  If we want to be Superbowl contenders then we should just trade back if our qb isn't there.  We could potentially have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds.  We grab our TE, DT, DE, and another WR. 

We go into next year with very little roster deficiencies with a ton of cap room, and potentially a top 15 pick. 

My point is, we need to have a roster strong enough to withstand 3 years without a 1st rounder before we make that kind of move.

 

Agree to disagree 

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

JawnyBlaze

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Kentucky Panther said:

I would rather move up to 3. Unless the staff thinks there’s only one guy in this draft that can be a franchise guy. I reckon at that point go get your man. The other strategies we’ve tried lately have failed miserably. 

If Chicago stays at 1, then I’d be ok just moving up to 3 even though I really prefer Stroud to Young. That might save us a 1st, or at least a 2nd to potentially get Young instead of Stroud. But if it’s looking like Chicago will trade to another team taking a QB, that team needs to be us.  The gap between Stroud/Young and Richardson/Levis is huge imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stuart Smith Mentor

Stuart Smith

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

You guys just don't get it. Any choice they make on a qb is a swing and a risk for the staff. This is their first time together and it sets the groundwork for the direction going forward. 

The options and opportunities are not ideal but they have to adapt to the situation if they are to continue this mad experiment. Any choice they decide to go with in a rookie qb is a swing regardless of round. It's a greater risk for the coach and his reputation but not so much for the team other than a wasted opportunity unless that swing is all you'll have for awhile. 

Going with a vet is a risk and a swing as well because they would be giving it one last bid for the vet qb with a proven veteran staff to make a run while developing a replacement assuming they have one.  It's a greater risk for the coach and possibly the team if the cost for the vet is crippling in the future. 

Any direction they end up going is one big swing at something that inevitably will not be good enough for the majority of this forum. It will be thoroughly entertaining. 

 

Well said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weyco2000 Mentor

weyco2000

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

That's a fair question.  We would need to have a high rating on all 3 similar to the Niners when they traded up for Lance.  It's a double edged sword really because if we wait and see if our top guy drops and he does say another team like ATL gets interested in drafting that same pick at 3 and it turns into a very fast bidding war.  

Lance is the perfect example of what NOT to do. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kentucky Panther Mentor

Kentucky Panther

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, JawnyBlaze said:

If Chicago stays at 1, then I’d be ok just moving up to 3 even though I really prefer Stroud to Young. That might save us a 1st, or at least a 2nd to potentially get Young instead of Stroud. But if it’s looking like Chicago will trade to another team taking a QB, that team needs to be us.  The gap between Stroud/Young and Richardson/Levis is huge imo

You think Houston would take Stroud over Young? I’m not so sure on that. I would feel pretty confident we get Stroud if we move to 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yup, which is a mistake I'd really prefer not to see us repeat.

Yeah but they were moving from lower than 8 so the cost will be less. We will have Fitt and Reich picking their QB which the board seems high on. If the Niners picked Fields or even Mac it could have been very different. They also weren’t crushed from giving up their picks. They are still a very competitive team that could have won it all without the QB injuries just 2 years later. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Yeah but they were moving from lower than 8 so the cost will be less. We will have Fitt and Reich picking their QB which the board seems high on. If the Niners picked Fields or even Mac it could have been very different. They also weren’t crushed from giving up their picks. They are still a very competitive team that could have won it all without the QB injuries just 2 years later. 

Still serves as a cautionary tale though...

Also FYI, in his recent mock Joe Person has us trading up to third overall. He mentions the possibility of trading to five given the connections between Fitterer, Morgan and the Seahawks front office but feels like three is safer to acquire one of the guys they really want.

For the record, his pick is Will Levis.

  • Pie 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

    • strato
      Why does Bryce get the blame?

      By strato · Posted

      To start with, you wouldn’t want to count up that value chart. You would see quickly where that is headed. But you basically did a quantity comparison, while ignoring quality.  I am looking at 2023 as the start, because it became all about Bryce.  2023 you have 4 picks plus DJ Moore for offense vs 2 (80 and 145) for defense.  2024 you got the 1st overall, the 32, the 46 and the 101 for offense vs 72, 157, 200 and 240 for defense. Leave the FA IOL out of it. Which was a crazy big  investment. But it wasn’t draft.  Anyway, that is basically 4 top 100 picks for offense and 4 picks for defense in 2024. Except they were 2 first rounders, the second rounder, and the 4th was really high at 101. Vs 72 and day three stuff. Please….  Second quoted/bolded… See you think we hate Bryce. That isn’t it at all. It is nice easy way to characterize us and discredit our talking points though.   Me, I do mostly hate watching him play. But I don’t hate the person. I hate the hell out of the stanning.  It started with the very first question I asked about his footwork, arm strength, and size. Height being the principle objection. I never even got to the durability factor. There was plenty without factoring that in.  But there was rabid opposition to even asking the question of what a couple of small fractions of a second extra closing time would do for the defenders.  What the extra time it takes to flip the hips would do vs a pass rush or on the other end after the ball is in the air. Split second more for recognition where it is going for the DBs.  The tippy toe backpedal.  That poo was a mess and it has always been mess but no Bryce fan wanted to hear it. “Go get another team to root for”. “It worked in the SEC it will be fine in the NFL you don’t know football you are just a hater”.  It got worse when the real games started. It has never stopped. It is nice that many people have left that train so there is less abuse but it hasn’t stopped.  So whatever… 
    • UnluckyforSome
      2025 College Football Thread

      By UnluckyforSome · Posted

      Whatever school you attended, I don't know and I don't care, but I would suggest demanding a refund.    Something was completely missed there.
    • CRA
      Why does Bryce get the blame?

      By CRA · Posted

      The draft capital since since 2023 has in no way been pretty even.  Especially when you zero in on day 1 and day 2 draft picks.  Draft capital has vastly gone toward the O over D.  
×
×
  • Create New...