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!

     

CBS Sports: Daniel Jones as a potential option for the Panthers to consider.


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Call the Lions and try to trade for Hendon Hooker and then take T-Mac to give him a great weapon set with Hubbard, Brooks, T-Mac, XL, Coker, and Sanders.

He's only 3.5 years younger than Goff and he only has 2 years left on his contract.  Unless he doesn't even want a chance at a starting spot competition, he's not going to re-sign with them.  If they can get a draft pick for him and then go out and sign another vet to be their backup to Goff, I think they'd do it.

See if we can get him for a future mid round pick, like a 4th or 5th rounder a year or two from now and give him the full season as the starter to see if he has a future in the league and with us.

If he does, awesome, we just found our QB on the cheap.

If he doesn't, then we're likely going to be bad enough to have a Top 10 pick in a QB loaded draft in 2026.

Edited by tukafan21
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Basbear said:

I'd honestly give the triangle + WF the win, even 8/10 winners

 In fairness, the triangle plus wake team would have some excellent talent.  If you are talking current players, Drake May at qb, Kenneth Walker and Bradley Chubb at running back, Jessie Bates at safety, Ekwonu and Zach Tom at tackle, etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Call the Lions and try to trade for Hendon Hooker and then take T-Mac to give him a great weapon set with Hubbard, Brooks, T-Mac, XL, Coker, and Sanders.

He's only 3.5 years younger than Goff and he only has 2 years left on his contract.  Unless he doesn't even want a chance at a starting spot competition, he's not going to re-sign with them.  If they can get a draft pick for him and then go out and sign another vet to be their backup to Goff, I think they'd do it.

See if we can get him for a future mid round pick, like a 4th or 5th rounder a year or two from now and give him the full season as the starter to see if he has a future in the league and with us.

If he does, awesome, we just found our QB on the cheap.

If he doesn't, then we're likely going to be bad enough to have a Top 10 pick in a QB loaded draft in 2026.

I've thought we could go after Hooker but I'm not sure they would trade him away. Having a QB with a. Couple of seasons on the bench learning is quite the useful thing to have. They would probably want a 2nd or 3rd based on what they spent. If we could get him for a 4th I'd jump on it and not even blink. 

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

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • 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
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...