Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Yasinskas suggests Gabbert at #1


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#1 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,530 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:33 PM

NFC South Blog

A lot of people would say Gabbert is a “reach’’ with the first overall pick and that may be true. But I’m wondering if Gabbert is good enough to go to a team desperate for a quarterback at No. 5, why isn’t he good enough to go to a team desperate for a quarterback at No. 1?

Franchise quarterbacks don’t come along often. As Carolina general manager Marty Hurney and new coach Ron Rivera work through all the scenarios over the next couple months, they’re going to be the ones who have to decide if Gabbert is a franchise quarterback.

He used a similar line of reasoning to suggest Newton as a #1 possibility a while back. Since both Kiper and McShay have Gabbert in the top five in their mocks, Yasinskas argues that if he's good enough to be in the top five, he might just be good enough for number one.

My position is unchanged. I don't believe there are any sure fire franchise QBs in the draft. We've already got two "project" QBs and don't need another.

No quarterbacks in any round. None :nonod:

#2 vorbis

vorbis

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 951 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:35 PM

you keep repeating that. i don't know if you're trying to convince the people on this board or yourself.

#3 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,530 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:45 PM

you keep repeating that. i don't know if you're trying to convince the people on this board or yourself.

Don't have to convince myself. I firmly believe it, and with good reason.

Whether or not others believe it doesn't really matter to me.

Whether or not the team believes it is something we'll find out in April.

(and no, the team isn't going to look to fans for guidance; nor should they)

#4 Swarly

Swarly

    MichaelJordanLaughing.gif

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,221 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:47 PM

hope he's wrong

no quarterbacks with #1 overall please!

#5 Big Ed

Big Ed

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 291 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:52 PM

#1 Pick is based on a players college records and a lot of media hype

Which may or may not transfer to an N F L career
Several top picks have BOMBED!!

My opinion is draft the player your team wants ,regardles of where he is ranked.
Years from now it want matter where he was ranked ,but if he's still playing .

And NO
I'm not saying draft a QB

#6 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,820 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:52 PM

I agree... I think a QB at #1 in this draft is a waste of the pick.

#7 Pox 08

Pox 08

    Luck of the Fryrish

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,448 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:53 PM

NFC South Blog

He used a similar line of reasoning to suggest Newton as a #1 possibility a while back. Since both Kiper and McShay have Gabbert in the top five in their mocks, Yasinskas argues that if he's good enough to be in the top five, he might just be good enough for number one.

My position is unchanged. I don't believe there are any sure fire franchise QBs in the draft. We've already got two "project" QBs and don't need another.

No quarterbacks in any round. None :nonod:


Are there ever any though? Ryan for example, how would his rookie year have went if his Oline let him get sacked more than 15 times and Turner didn't explode. Bradford had the entire offense recalled and re-designed to fit around his strengths, as did Stafford and Freeman. All are considered franchise qbs that I think could have failed horribly if their teams didn't put the time and energy into making them "their guys".

#8 Stroupe-a-loop

Stroupe-a-loop

    SeƱor Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,561 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:57 PM

I think Gabbert is a reach at five. I just don't see it. We won two games last year, and we cannot miss on this draft pick. We shouldn't panic and grab some quarterback because somebody else may be desperate enough to get him at five. We have the first pick, get the best player.

#9 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,530 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:58 PM

Are there ever any though? Ryan for example, how would his rookie year have went if his Oline let him get sacked more than 15 times and Turner didn't explode. Bradford had the entire offense recalled and re-designed to fit around his strengths, as did Stafford and Freeman. All are considered franchise qbs that I think could have failed horribly if their teams didn't put the time and energy into making them "their guys".

Anyone can fail, but guys like Ryan, Manning, Luck and others are a cut above. And for the record, I didn't consider Bradford a franchise QB (still don't).

There are actually a fair number of draft classes that don't really have a franchise QB in their ranks. People make the mistake of equating "best QB available" in a particular draft with "franchise quarterback". Those two things are not automatically equivalent.

#10 countryboi

countryboi

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,330 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC born and raised

Posted 14 February 2011 - 02:59 PM

i would rather draft cam if we are going to reach for a QB....at least he has the physical freak thing going for him

#11 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,530 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:02 PM

We shouldn't panic and grab some quarterback because somebody else may be desperate enough to get him at five. We have the first pick, get the best player.

This is something I wish more people understood.

Yes, we have a need at quarterback. And yes, there are quarterbacks available in the draft. Those two factors do not automatically mean that uising the top pick on a quarterback is the best way to go. There are other options.

And again, we really picked a lousy year to need a quarterback :(

#12 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,820 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:11 PM

i would rather draft cam if we are going to reach for a QB....at least he has the physical freak thing going for him


I would agree with this...

#13 blackcatgrowl

blackcatgrowl

    Trolls live here

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,944 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:17 PM

i would rather draft cam if we are going to reach for a QB....at least he has the physical freak thing going for him


And he's got the media's eye too. We need people in seats. I don't want blackouts. I think Cam ultimately has a better chance at bringing in some crowds than anyone else.

#14 jimbo baggins

jimbo baggins

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 463 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:18 PM

i don't know poo about gabbert so that's a no

#15 Swarly

Swarly

    MichaelJordanLaughing.gif

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,221 posts

Posted 14 February 2011 - 03:19 PM

And he's got the media's eye too. We need people in seats. I don't want blackouts. I think Cam ultimately has a better chance at bringing in some crowds than anyone else.


if we sold out a Carolina/Arizona game, I doubt we'll have any problems with blackouts lol :D


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.