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!

     

Ryan Poles trying to drive up the cost of the #1 pick

NAS

By NAS,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, NAS said:

I think this happens if they sign Derek Carr or another vet QB and draft a 'prospect' at #9 like Anthony Richardson.  

Signing a vet regardless.  Not going to go into the season with two QBs with zero regular seasons starts.  The level of the vet depends on where the QB is drafted.  Top 3, a cheaper vet, #9 or later, an expensive vet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NAS Grand Master

NAS

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, weyco2000 said:

I doubt they would do it for 3 first’s. 

I think 49ers set the price two years ago but theirs was a late first.  I think Panthers should stay put at two first, a second, and a third.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, weyco2000 said:

I doubt they would do it for 3 first’s. 

Hopefully, Tepper stays out of this, but I doubt it.  Maybe he learned his lesson form Rhule and lets the football people do their jobs he's paying them to do.  Obviously he's going to be in the loop, I mean influencing decisions.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NanuqoftheNorth Grand Master

NanuqoftheNorth

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, bigdog_10_2002 said:

The panthers drafted Jason Peter, no pick due to the Gilbert trade in 99 (98), and Rashard Anderson in 2000 (basically forfeiting three consecutive years of first round picks).  They were in the superbowl in 2003.

Weird, I don't recall seeing either Dom Capers or George Seifert at the 2003 Super Bowl.

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NanuqoftheNorth Grand Master

NanuqoftheNorth

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The thing about those generational prospects is there's no trading for them. The team that lands #1 takes the guy.

I believe an argument could be made, that if the Bears were smart, they'd draft a QB with this year's #1 pick.  

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

I believe an argument could be made, that if the Bears were smart, they'd draft a QB with this year's #1 pick.  

If we're talking about risk, THAT would be the biggest risk a team could take in this draft. You have a young guy who has shown promise despite being surrounded by nothing. If you move him to take another QB you damn well better be right because if you draft a bust and Fields goes on to flourish elsewhere you're now officially the biggest jackass in sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NanuqoftheNorth Grand Master

NanuqoftheNorth

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If we're talking about risk, THAT would be the biggest risk a team could take in this draft. You have a young guy who has shown promise despite being surrounded by nothing. If you move him to take another QB you damn well better be right because if you draft a bust and Fields goes on to flourish elsewhere you're now officially the biggest jackass in sports.

Or, Chicago trades Fields to a team in desperate need for a QB and utilizes this year's #1 to upgrade the position.  Ultimately, both teams involved (even Fields) could be better off for the trade.  Of course, most of these draft scenarios will never take place, much less, be sure bets.  If they were, we'd have little to converse about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KatsAzz Grand Master

KatsAzz

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, 45catfan said:

Lol, and us being the furthest back of the QB needy teams to move up would have to give up a TON to go to #1, but I'm getting flack for suggesting we stay put at #9.

Some of you guys would give up your first born child to move to #1. 

Copied post: ("I rather trade up to #3 and keep that extra 1st round pick we would lose if we traded with the Bears. We are guaranteed at least one of the top 3 QB's. They all same to be on the same tier as talents. I want Stroud but I would be happy with AR or Bryce at #3 or vice versa")

Link to comment
Share on other sites
45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, KatsAzz said:

Copied post: ("I rather trade up to #3 and keep that extra 1st round pick we would lose if we traded with the Bears. We are guaranteed at least one of the top 3 QB's. They all same to be on the same tier as talents. I want Stroud but I would be happy with AR or Bryce at #3 or vice versa")

True, IF we do move up, #3 is better than #1 for me.  I don't want to move up at all, but keeping our 2025 first round pick while getting a top QB is the smarter solution.

  • 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

    • CPF4LIFE
      Good film breakdown of Young. Good and bad. Film examples

      By CPF4LIFE · Posted

      From what i see, Canales offense requires a QB that is willing to take chances to maximize the offense. XL is also the kind of receiver that needs a qb to be risky to bring out his full potential. Its just a matter of if Bryce is gonna be that QB.
    • CRA
      Good film breakdown of Young. Good and bad. Film examples

      By CRA · Posted

      Baker just played how Baker played.... everywhere but here. He is a risk taking gunslinger.  Always has been.  And last year was asked to be what he was.   Geno Smith was the best deep ball passer in the NFL his comeback season.  Wasn't even close that year.  Again, that's the type passer Canales has always been around in the offenses he has been part of.  The pass game that compliments the stubborn run is the deep chunk play pass game.   And that was his first investment with XL.  My continued point, is the same as going into last season.  It's a bad marriage going in.  The QB doesn't fit the scheme.  Again.  Carrol/Fox/Ron....all paired up their boring football with risk taking QBs.  And again, I'm fine if that is where we are going.  It's not my preference but that's not my argument.  I'm saying if we are doing that, we need a QB that matches it.     
    • ForJimmy
      Good film breakdown of Young. Good and bad. Film examples

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      I guess you missed the point. His rushing attack was dead last yet his team still performed. That’s not Fox/Rivera ball. His QB also had a career year. Remember the same QB that played for us in the same division and was so bad he was cut?  Carroll coached after Lynch as well. In fact Canales was more involved in the more recent offense with Geno Smith and a good rushing attack. People are taking him wanting a rushing attack and assuming that means we are shutting down our passing attack. Again many of the top offenses like SF, Miami, and Detroit featured strong rushing attacks. 
×
×
  • Create New...