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!

     

Breaking: Lamar Jackson is available as Raven's have placed the non-exclusive franchise tag on him.

thunderraiden

By thunderraiden,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

WUnderhill Grand Master

WUnderhill

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, thunderraiden said:

 



League MVP without a deal.

He was an MVP 4 years ago and he’s pretty much performed worse in every statistical category each year since then and hasn’t played a full season since 2020. I don’t really get the narrative. Hard pass on trading 2 firsts plus the contract. I’d be down for signing him to the right deal if he were a free agent, but he’s not.

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

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CPcavedweller said:

It's a mess because we are about to trade even more assets away for someone who may or may not be worthwhile. Add to that we may be trying to trade with a Conference foe who already has a QB and we could just be mortgaging our future to look up at them. We have a solid QB and can't add talent around them. 

That's the trade-off and why I'd rather trade down, stack talent, and work on getting enough picks to take Maye or Williams next year. You can stack, stack, stack talent on days 1 and 2 in this draft but we are going to avoid doing that to take a guy like Will Levis. 

I'd be good with Anthony Richardson, though not trading up much to get him, or Stroud. The recent history on teams who have traded up for QB's isn't pretty, at all. None of them since 2015 are on the team that drafted them. 

Kansas City Chiefs Wow GIF by State FarmThink Josh Allen GIF by Buffalo Bills

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadianCat Veteran

CanadianCat

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

It's a mess because we are about to trade even more assets away for someone who may or may not be worthwhile. Add to that we may be trying to trade with a Conference foe who already has a QB and we could just be mortgaging our future to look up at them. We have a solid QB and can't add talent around them. 

That's the trade-off and why I'd rather trade down, stack talent, and work on getting enough picks to take Maye or Williams next year. You can stack, stack, stack talent on days 1 and 2 in this draft but we are going to avoid doing that to take a guy like Will Levis. 

I'd be good with Anthony Richardson, though not trading up much to get him, or Stroud. The recent history on teams who have traded up for QB's isn't pretty, at all. None of them since 2015 are on the team that drafted them. 

If we cannot get Stroud or CJ then I would be ok with a trade down and running with Corall... and Jimmy our way to a QB next year. 

That said.. I dont think anyone on that building would want that. We are getting a QB this year one way or another.

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, bigpoppa said:

So if the Ravens decide to match the contract, does he have to sign it? I get that they can match what he agrees to with another team, but if they decide to match can't he just refuse to sign? This is assuming he is done with Baltimore and wants out.

He'd have to have signed it for them to match it.

They have a week to decide.

Edited by Mr. Scot
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadianCat Veteran

CanadianCat

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, *FreeFua* said:

If we do end up at 1 I believe most of the mock trades floating around with pick compensation going to Chicago will seem very light versus what we actually give up 

Yeah.. As a guy that loves draft season.. the next few years will be pretty boring I think. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtm Rising Star

jtm

Posted
Posted

If Baltimore matches a deal I'm not convinced that Lamar will accept it and go back to Baltimore.  No team wants a player that doesn't want to be there and you certainly don't want to pay this player a mega contract.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
t96 Grand Master

t96

Posted
Posted

It's not exactly the Steelers' MO but I'd love to see him go to a division rival via the non-exclusive tag. Obviously the Browns and Bengals are set at QB so Pittsburgh is the only option there. 

 

I think he winds up getting much less of a market than he hoped for and he goes back to the Ravens for a somewhat reasonable (not fully guaranteed) contract. Either way I hope like hell we don't even bother with exploring this. Regardless of the contract (which will have to be ridiculous to snatch him away) I don't want to give up 2 firsts for a QB who won't even be healthy come playoff time and who averages like 2500 passing yards a season

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

Ricky Spanish

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, joemac said:

Real life is not a JRPG

No but the fact that running QBs take far more hits, even if they aren't big, means their shelf life is much shorter than guys who generally throw from the pocket. 

It becomes a numbers game at some point. It's the NFL, you get hit every time you hold the ball. Injury chances go up the more often you expose your body to the those hits. And the more hits you take, the weaker your body gets as the season and the years grind on. It's why RBs start falling off at 26 and why Running QBs adapt to being passing QBs or get hurt and fall off a cliff because their bodies can't take the pounding anymore. It's fun while it lasts but historically, it doesn't last long. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 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

    • csx
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By csx · Posted

      Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • kungfoodude
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control  Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst roster in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most voliate franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete diaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
    • Tr3ach
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By Tr3ach · Posted

      I think he has started to build a culture here.  I think if we had a qb with no limitations we would be seeing a lot more with the offense.  I think most of the coaches that come in and instantly win went to teams that were underachieving previously based on roster talent level.  Based on our roster talent,  we werent underachieving,  we were just bad.
×
×
  • Create New...