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!

     

Dan Morgan is an awful GM


Joe Bear
 Share

Recommended Posts

While I hate the Dionte trade I don't think it's call Dan a bad GM yet. He revamped our offensive line in one offseason - yes the defense suffered because of this but we KNEW that was going to happen. DJ having an unpredictable blood clot and Derrick Brown gettin hurt made that decision look worse. The draft is still TBD, although it's very possible he got four contributors to this team in the first four rounds which is FAR better than we've done in like almost ten years of drafting. 

You can't rebuild Rome in a day. Dan was faced with a near impossible task. I still have faith in him 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Logically, it is. 

Now that said, early returns aren't great. 

For whatever you think of hIm, Fitterer had a plan. He articulated that plan on a regular basis.

Did he execute that plan successfully? No, but the plan itself at least made sense. 

Perhaps I haven't listened enough, but if Morgan has articulated any sort of plan, I missed it.

If Fitterer’s plan was to trade all the good players away to draft shitter replacements, mission accomplished. Otherwise I have no idea what his plan actually was. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Said it before, but after last year's disaster, Tepper should have fired anyone and everyone associated with that season, even the f'ing janitor.  This franchise is doomed until Tepper sells, bottom line.  He simply can't keep his nose out of things and does nothing but hire 'yes men'.  I checked out on this team years ago, so these moves/results don't bother me.  I get that Tepper feels like he should play a part in his investment, but the problem is that he doesn't know what he's doing and wont hire/listen to people who actually do.  

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fitt's back breaking moves killed this franchise. Dan hasn't made any critical mistakes that would make me think he's a bad GM yet. Jury is still out. To make a move like this likely means that Diontee was locker room cancer and fed up with being here. So instead of cutting him we got a little something instead of nothing. Not the end of the word. It's not like missing out on 2 first round picks for Brian Burns or something. It's a dinky little move in a nothing season that no one will remember in a year. Great deal? No. It's likely Canales wanted Diontee gone because of a rotten attitude imo, and we got few little sheckles in the process. Yeah we're on the hook for the money for this season, but I don't want that money helping us this season. Burn it. Trade another good player. Go for it. Tank this down all the way, burn the tank, and sell the spare parts. 1-16 is what everyone here should want. Idc about the 3 million. Keep losing. We'll try and fix this next season without most of these poop players and horrible DC.

  • 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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...