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!

     

Y’all are overreacting


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

We didn't even sell anyone besides Burns, just let a bunch of dudes walk instead of at least trying to get some kinda of compensation for them. Usually teams try to accrue as much draft capital as possible even if it's 7ths or conditional picks. Morgan seems like he gave up before even trying on most these guys. And then I don't think you shell out $20M a year to a guard with hamstring issues if you're doing a true rebuild. 

The reason they were cut and not traded is because they weren’t worth what they were making. Why would a team trade a 7th round pick to take on a bad contract like Bozeman’s? I’m not sure I understand why you would think Morgan would cut guys if he could trade them instead.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luvu is the only guy I hate losing. The rest I am okay with. This was not something that was going to be a quick turnaround. I’m not going to judge until the end of the offseason. Realistically, I can’t judge until 2-3 years down the road.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tarheel119 said:

Luvu is the only guy I hate losing. The rest I am okay with. This was not something that was going to be a quick turnaround. I’m not going to judge until the end of the offseason. Realistically, I can’t judge until 2-3 years down the road.

Agree. But if they replace him with Queen, then I'm not too mad about that anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jackie Lee said:

We didn't even sell anyone besides Burns, just let a bunch of dudes walk instead of at least trying to get some kinda of compensation for them. Usually teams try to accrue as much draft capital as possible even if it's 7ths or conditional picks. Morgan seems like he gave up before even trying on most these guys. And then I don't think you shell out $20M a year to a guard with hamstring issues if you're doing a true rebuild. 

So you are saying we should have given them contracts and then traded them away to accrue dead cap?... Contracts that outside of Luvu, I wouldn't want our front office to offer...

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Dave Gettleman's Shorts said:

not overreacting, this is the BS pretty much every panthers called out when the bad decisions and moves were being made. except even worse than worst case scenarios

We are paying, what we are paying, and getting the returns of trades because of the position we were put in 4 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The return on Burns sucks but going all in on the o-line makes sense to me. If that group's finally strong then next season is our definitive look at what Young is capable of. If he continues to struggle then we've already rolled out of the red carpet for his replacement. 

The defense has been thoroughly gutted though and that worries me. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Panthers Fan 69 said:

 

Honestly, this is what should have happened 4 years ago. Sell everyone and just start over. You have Ron Fat Fhule and Frank hold overs and y’all weren’t winning. Gut this thing and completely rebuild like the 95 Panthers. 
 

 

Yep burn it down, I just now saw they moved Burns... I was busy betting on everything under the sun 🤣 didn't sleep though so I should probably lay off while I'm up 4k.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I defended not trading burns at the time because I figured a deal was imminent and he was the only pass rusher we had.

The moment Fitterrer balked at signing him to a long term deal we were fucked. Not trading him only boosted his asking price, which the FO should have realized, so when Burns asked to be paid like a player worthy of two firsts and a second round pick we of course didn't think he was worth that money?

In what world does that make sense?

 

Fitt was bad.png

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

I defended not trading burns at the time because I figured a deal was imminent and he was the only pass rusher we had.

The moment Fitterrer balked at signing him to a long term deal we were fucked. Not trading him only boosted his asking price, which the FO should have realized, so when Burns asked to be paid like a player worthy of two firsts and a second round pick we of course didn't think he was worth that money?

In what world does that make sense?

 

Fitt was bad.png

and I will contend to this day, there is no player in the nfl that isnt a qb that you dont accept that offer for.  2 firsts and a second and anyone gets traded.   Ive watched football for far to long to know that a player can simply fall off a cliff at any moment.  That type of draft capital, if parlayed correctly, can set your team up for a long time

  • Pie 2
  • 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

×
×
  • Create New...