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!

     

We’re trading for #1 pick !!!

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

GOAT Veteran

GOAT

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Krovvy said:

There was also the Sam Darnold, Baker Mayfield, and C.J. Henderson trades.

I really can't fault him for trying to kick the tires on two former #1 QB's that needed another shot for a day two pick idk. lesson learned. watch this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krovvy Grand Master

Krovvy

Posted
Posted
Just now, GOAT said:

I really can't fault him for trying to kick the tires on two former #1 QB's that needed another shot for a day two pick idk. lesson learned. watch this.

It is what it is. I'm just saying that for the trades he's made, a lot of them didn't work out at the time.

This trade is more or less necessary. You can't build a somewhat complete team, with a great coaching staff, and not have a quarterback. At this point they had to move up to get their guy, either first overall or third.

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

Proudiddy

Posted
Posted

I feel like the trade should've been good enough with just the picks.  Not thrilled about the cost, but excited to see what we do at #1.  And I'll miss DJ.  I hope he flourishes with Fields.

And yet, I also feel like I'm surprised we only gave up two firsts if that makes any sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Huddler Veteran

The Huddler

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TN05 said:

We need a #1 WR, #2 WR, TE, and RB but hey at least we’ll have a rookie quarterback. Hope he enjoys having nobody to throw the ball to… but that’s not a problem, right?

we have FA and the draft bro

 

go touch some grass.  All the positions players in their world dont mean poo without a franchise QB

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

Carl Spackler

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Proudiddy said:

I feel like the trade should've been good enough with just the picks.  Not thrilled about the cost, but excited to see what we do at #1.  And I'll miss DJ.  I hope he flourishes with Fields.

And yet, I also feel like I'm surprised we only gave up two firsts if that makes any sense.

I would have told them to get fuged when they asked for Moore. Instead, they gave up Moore for Will Levis, Richardson or Kyler Murray.

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

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...