What would you ask from Houston?

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, kass said:

What's the leverage?

Panthers cannot threaten with a trade back, because then they would loose out on their QB. 

So Panthers only trade partner is the Texans and this is assuming the Texans only want one QB... 

The Panthers like more than one quarterback.

Edited March 11, 2023 by Mr. Scot

[rippadonn]

Houston, stop calling, stop texting, stop asking mutual friends to see what's up. I've already got Stroud jerseys being cut and stitched, stay the f' out of my way up to the podium.

[kass]

4 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

You can also look at it the other way around and I think it makes the idea of trading back to #2 look insane.

If we had the #2 pick and were comfortable with two of the QB's, but we preferred one over the other, there wouldn't be a single person who has any issue with giving up a 2nd round pick to make the swap and take the guy we prefer.

So why would we do the opposite to then let the other team decide.

They'd have to have some sort of 1000% certainty that the Texans would be taking the QB we didn't prefer, and even then, I'd be very skeptical that it would play out that way.  Because as I've said in the other threads, if the Texans felt we weren't taking the guy they wanted, they'd never make the trade with us, so fi they were to want to swap, to me, it says it means they think we're taking the guy they want.

Exactly  

[tukafan21]

I think what people also seem to be forgetting is that if the Texans really only wanted one of the QB's, there is basically a 100% certainty that they'd have already made the trade with the Bears.

There is no way the Bears made this trade without first re-checking with the Texans to try and swap, as trading down twice would have been the best thing for them, they'd still have been able to send that #2 overall pick to us for almost the same trade.  

We probably could have kept that 2025 2nd rounder, but still sent them everything else, and they likely would have gotten the equivalent, if not more, than that from the Texans to move down.

Edited March 11, 2023 by tukafan21

[kass]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The Panthers like more than one quarterback.

You have stated multiple times now that the Panthers wouldn't go below 2. 

So what is the leverage? Do Texans only like one? Is that confirmed?

[NanuqoftheNorth]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

If you're getting a franchise QB either way, who cares what spot you picked them at?

Are you?

The futures of these two QBs are not written in stone.

When I look at Bryce Young and CJ Stroud I don't see equal outcomes.

One or both could fail to realize their potential.  Chances are good at least one won't.

If I'm the Panthers, I'd want to make that final decision, rather than leaving it up to Houston to decide my team's fate.

Own it, Panthers.

Own your decision. 

[Jay Roosevelt]

I'd only do this if we know for a fact they're not taking the QB we want or if we legitimately have two guys rated equally.

I'd ask for their other 1st rounder and would be willing to trade our 2nd to make it happen. With that pick we could take the best WR in the draft.

[WUnderhill]

I don’t really see how 12 is an option but it would obviously be a no brainer if it was.

[KSpan]

18 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

You can also look at it the other way around and I think it makes the idea of trading back to #2 look insane.

If we had the #2 pick and were comfortable with two of the QB's, but we preferred one over the other, there wouldn't be a single person who has any issue with giving up a 2nd round pick to make the swap and take the guy we prefer.

So why would we do the opposite to then let the other team decide.

They'd have to have some sort of 1000% certainty that the Texans would be taking the QB we didn't prefer, and even then, I'd be very skeptical that it would play out that way.  Because as I've said in the other threads, if the Texans felt we weren't taking the guy they wanted, they'd never make the trade with us, so fi they were to want to swap, to me, it says it means they think we're taking the guy they want.

That's the whole point of reading back, that you're still assured of getting a player you want and/or value as much as any other. We have no idea what the FO really wants to do and as such can only speculate, but the notion that they value more than one QB the same and would cash in on it if they could is perfectly logical.

[tukafan21]

2 minutes ago, KSpan said:

That's the whole point of reading back, that you're still assured of getting a player you want and/or value as much as any other. We have no idea what the FO really wants to do and as such can only speculate, but the notion that they value more than one QB the same and would cash in on it if they could is perfectly logical.

Yes, perfectly logical if they are a literal and complete tie as to which QB they'd prefer, but it's not logical in the slightest to think they can't find a way to separate them and have a preference.

And yes, I realize they may be comfortable with either, but in the end, these guys are two very different players, to the point where the staff will be able to have one ranked over the other.  

Once you have a preference, I just see no legitimate reasoning to allowing another team to dictate which one we take when it's about the QB position.  To me, that's what it all comes down to in the end, it's the most important position in all of sports and we have the chance now to pick the one we prefer, you make the pick yourself.

[Wolfcop]

It really depends on the Panthers' evaluation of the top 2 QBs. Do they view them as 1a & 1b or 1.....2. 

[kungfoodude]

I would trade down for a first rounder and a second. That's about it.

[frankw]

Considering we just traded a 25 yo WR to move up 8 spots they better offer a damn nice package or they can kick rocks. Even still. Why give them or anyone the chance to choose the first QB? We made the move. Make the pick and be done with it.

[panther4life]

1. I don't think this will happen

2. If it were to happen, why would Houston pull the trigger on any trade until they are on the clock? Either we take their number 1 choice and influence them to trade up, or we don't and they give up nothing to get their guy.

3. The precedent has already been set by the Bears trade from 3 to 2 for Tribusky in 2017.  They gave 67(3rd rounder),111(4th rounder) and the next years 3rd. Sure you could probably squeeze a little more juice out of this one but I don't think we are getting 12 from them.