Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why drafting a QB is more likely than you think


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#31 carolinashawn

carolinashawn

    Pure Awesomeness

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 07:14 PM

For the sake of arguement if we were going after a QB with the #1, wouldn't it make more sense to trade the pick to the Eagles for Kolb. I mean, you at least know the upside (above average) immediately. Just given my .02. If I had to choose between Newton/Gabbert or Kolb, it would be Kolb.

#32 TheRealDeal

TheRealDeal

    Senior Member

  • TROLLOLOL
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,418 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 07:17 PM

For the sake of arguement if we were going after a QB with the #1, wouldn't it make more sense to trade the pick to the Eagles for Kolb. I mean, you at least know the upside (above average) immediately. Just given my .02. If I had to choose between Newton/Gabbert or Kolb, it would be Kolb.


Kolb is a poor man's Matt Moore. Do not trade anything for Kolb. No.

#33 MaineManPanther

MaineManPanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,456 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 07:20 PM

While the odds are more or less the same. The fact is picking a bad QB hurts a team significantly more the picking a bad DT.

We shouldn't just pick a QB because we need to, as with any position.

Personally,if the FO feels strongly about a specific QB in the draft, doesn't feel confident in our current bunch, and can't trade down, then I don't have a problem getting a QB with the first pick.
Our FO have proven there worth in the first round.

#34 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,113 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 18 February 2011 - 07:41 PM

While the odds are more or less the same. The fact is picking a bad QB hurts a team significantly more the picking a bad DT.

We shouldn't just pick a QB because we need to, as with any position.

Personally,if the FO feels strongly about a specific QB in the draft, doesn't feel confident in our current bunch, and can't trade down, then I don't have a problem getting a QB with the first pick.
Our FO have proven there worth in the first round.


THe only way it sets you back is if you not only pick a QB but you pay him a ton of money and feel compelled to stick with him even when he plays poorly. With a rookie cap almost assured, it means that although the first pick will be expensive, it won't be the 70 million deal like Ryan got. It means that you don't end up with a guy you have to start right away or stick with no matter what. You can also bring him along which improves the chances you don't have a bust.
I would think that a bust number 1 pick hurts you anyway you go. Unless you are Detroit and get one the next year too. LOL

Edited by panthers55, 18 February 2011 - 09:37 PM.


#35 raleigh-panther

raleigh-panther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,166 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 08:34 PM

it will take balls to go after newton, but it's the kind of balls that will make you serious contenders.

and for all that "it will set the franchise abck 2-3 years if he busts" crap...what is really going to set this franchise back 2-3 years and probably 6 years is if we go out and get some stop gap player while we wait and see if clausen or pike has what it takes and let them sit a year or two more, because if they don't have it and you wait on them (or any young QB) a couple years before you give them a shot and then give them a couple more years of PT before you form a decision on him and then he doesn't turn out then you have to do the whole thing all over again. that is how you find yoursleves on the bottom for 5-6 years. that is why we are in this situation to begin with because we were too scared of making a mistake with a QB or too blind to see how big a deal getting an actual franchise QB in here is.


Rayzor is right in my opinion, but, I often think he is.

Safe and boring, that's what the Panthers have been for many years.

Where has it gotten them?

I believe I heard Rivera say 'tall QB' several times in the podcast, and if there is on thing Clausen isn't it is tall. Pike is tall, but, that is about it, a wasted 6th round pick.

Between Newton and Gabbert, just chalk me up for Newton, and I have no stats to prove it, other than the feeling that he has more athletic ability than any QB.

One thing is for damned sure, he could probably run for a first down, vs. checkdowns for lost yardage.

#36 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,958 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 09:31 PM

meh, we can't keep throwing our first pick at QB. If we take Newton, we better stick with him even if he blows next year...

#37 Snake

Snake

    swagaholic

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,214 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 10:01 PM

I'm almost positive we go QB first overall, HIV positive, even...


Only reason I think we will is because no other player will rise to the top. If there was a dominate CB or DT on the board I would not be so sure.


meh, we can't keep throwing our first pick at QB. If we take Newton, we better stick with him even if he blows next year...


Ideally he want even start till then. Every QB needs two years for the lights to fully come on. I still want to see what Clausen has but I want to have a back up plan because he seems ill fitted for the Coryell system. IMO he would be much better with a team that runs the WCO.

Edited by Snake_Fist_Gung_Fu, 18 February 2011 - 10:03 PM.


#38 Cracka McNasty

Cracka McNasty

    WWNPHD?

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,382 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:06 PM

that's an indefinite amount of time. if he isn't ready sit him until he is, even though he may never be?

the ssoner we can get him in the game and find out what we have to work with and what to build on, the better. the sooner he can get in there and play the game, the better. the best way for him to learn is on the field in real game situations. we have to have the balls to let him in there, take his lumps, and help him really build and develop. you won't do him any favors by protecting him. everything is just theory until they start to see play time.


yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.

#39 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,494 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:16 PM

meh, we can't keep throwing our first pick at QB. If we take Newton, we better stick with him even if he blows next year...


As much as I want us to take him I hope he doesn't start next year. At least not until very late in the season if at all. No matter who we draft we will not be world beaters overnight. Progress WHOEVER we pick into the lineup at a proper pace.

#40 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,958 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:26 PM

I would like our situation to be good enough that no matter what our quarterback situation is, we don't need to force a player into starting before they are ready. But recent history makes me worry we may not have that luxury. It may be that a rookie QB would end up starting at some point his rookie year, though hopefully not as early as Week 3.

#41 grateflday

grateflday

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,377 posts

Posted 18 February 2011 - 11:56 PM

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.


This is exacetly why they will also be bringing in a Vet this offseason, somehow. Our staff will be a Vet, Clausen, and Cam.

#42 Snake

Snake

    swagaholic

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,214 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 12:17 AM

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.


Well you could look at that two ways. In one way if your like the Bucs that have no vet presence and really nothing to lose by starting him then do so to see if he can produce. On the other hand if your like Pittsburgh or Cinci that had a Vet that is established you start them and let your QB learn. Either way I think the cream always rises to the top. None of our QBs including Moore ever developed with time and thats why we are in the situation we are.

#43 MaineManPanther

MaineManPanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,456 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 01:41 AM

THe only way it sets you back is if you not only pick a QB but you pay him a ton of money and feel compelled to stick with him even when he plays poorly. With a rookie cap almost assured, it means that although the first pick will be expensive, it won't be the 70 million deal like Ryan got. It means that you don't end up with a guy you have to start right away or stick with no matter what. You can also bring him along which improves the chances you don't have a bust.
I would think that a bust number 1 pick hurts you anyway you go. Unless you are Detroit and get one the next year too. LOL


At some point your going to have to play him for the majority of the season regardless if he plays poorly, otherwise your stuck in limbo on knowing where you stand and what to do with him.

Also if you draft a number one Qb chances are you don't have another consistenly good QB on your roster. So even if you bench your drafted QB, your offence and team will still hampred by your number one pick's poor play.

And if because he was picked number one, its proable to assume that no other high calibur QB's were drafted or signed during that period So if the Qb ends up being a bust, you will proably be setback agian by devloping yet another QB.

#44 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,053 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 01:49 AM

There may not be an elite QB in this draft, whereas there might be an elite DT.


I think by their second year Newton will be a better NFL player than Fairley.

#45 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,494 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 01:57 PM

I would like our situation to be good enough that no matter what our quarterback situation is, we don't need to force a player into starting before they are ready. But recent history makes me worry we may not have that luxury. It may be that a rookie QB would end up starting at some point his rookie year, though hopefully not as early as Week 3.


One of the benefits with Newton in my opinion is even if he gets thrown in the fire too soon, his ability to run will get him out of some jams that traditional QB's don't have the luxury of being able to do.

I still hope he sits for the majority of the year.

That still doesn't mean I think he is a project. No QB is ready on day 1.


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.