Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why we draft a QB #1 overall = Tony Pike


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
37 replies to this topic

#1 OchoNueve

OchoNueve

    for those of you that don't habla espanol...

  • Joined: 08-August 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,222
  • Reputation: 158
HUDDLER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 09:49 AM

The only way we don't draft a QB #1 overall is if the Panthers are sold on Tony Pike. I know it sounds crazy, but hear me out.... Even if they still believe that Clausen could be their franchise guy and choose a position other than QB #1 overall, it is "putting all your eggs in one basket" that he is the QB of the future and all he needs is time to develop. Competition breeds greatness and if we don't select a QB #1 overall and choose to get a "stop gap" QB, then we are left with Clausen competing with Tony Pike and a "Stop Gap" veteran to become this "great" QB for the future. When the dust settles in a season or two and a final verdict has been reached, maybe Clausen has proved himself worthy, but maybe he hasn't and where has that left us as an organization? With an aging "stop gap" ready to retire , Tony Pike, and most likely another opportunity to select a QB high in the draft.

For those saying Cam Newton or Gabbert is a bust or not worthy of #1 overall... You may be correct. But why not take a shot now so we have two (three if you count Pike, i don't) highly touted, young prospects fight for the opportunity to be a franchise QB instead of just putting all the faith in Jimmy? That is all the draft is... a shot in the dark. No matter what position you choose, you are putting a lot of faith in one person to be a great player for years to come. If we take that shot in the dark on Cam or Gabbert, maybe Clausen beats out the competition, maybe Cam or Gabbert runs away with it, maybe they all suck, maybe we have the Next Kolb/Vick combo playing behind center... At least I will sleep well knowing that whomever is starting for my Carolina Panthers won the job outright in a competitive environment instead of being given the position by default.

Edited by OchoNueve, 01 March 2011 - 09:57 AM.


#2 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,128
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 01 March 2011 - 09:50 AM

new coaching staffs never are sold on leftover QBs. That is why they always go out and find their own guys pending they didn't inherit a Superbowl QB.

#3 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,530
  • Reputation: 393
HUDDLER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 09:58 AM

This is worse than your Hard Knocks thread.

#4 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • Joined: 04-January 09
  • posts: 15,549
  • Reputation: 2,798
SUPPORTER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 09:58 AM

We won't draft a QB # 1 overall because there are no QB's in this draft even close to being worth a # 1 overall pick... has nothing to do with Pike.

Look at Hurney's draft history, we take safe picks... this tells me it will be Bowers or Dareus.

#5 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,128
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 01 March 2011 - 10:07 AM

We won't draft a QB # 1 overall because there are no QB's in this draft even close to being worth a # 1 overall pick... has nothing to do with Pike.

Look at Hurney's draft history, we take safe picks... this tells me it will be Bowers or Dareus.


trading away a first rounder for an undersized 2nd round DE doesn't scream safe. Looked like a reach when a team knew they were about to have a huge hole at DE.

Edited by CRA, 01 March 2011 - 10:16 AM.


#6 Cracka McNasty

Cracka McNasty

    WWNPHD?

  • Joined: 27-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,164
  • Reputation: 1,883
HUDDLER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 10:14 AM

We won't draft a QB # 1 overall because there are no QB's in this draft even close to being worth a # 1 overall pick... has nothing to do with Pike.

Look at Hurney's draft history, we take safe picks... this tells me it will be Bowers or Dareus.


I respectfully disagree with you.

Bradford wasn't as good as Suh, but they took a chance on him, seemed to work out his first year.

I'm about 81.78% positive that we take a QB with our pick. whether it is gabbert or newton is yet to be determined.

#7 OchoNueve

OchoNueve

    for those of you that don't habla espanol...

  • Joined: 08-August 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,222
  • Reputation: 158
HUDDLER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 10:14 AM

This is worse than your Hard Knocks thread.


Ahh, yes another thread in which you are a complete douche

#8 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,128
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 01 March 2011 - 10:18 AM

I respectfully disagree with you.

Bradford wasn't as good as Suh, but they took a chance on him, seemed to work out his first year.

I'm about 81.78% positive that we take a QB with our pick. whether it is gabbert or newton is yet to be determined.


good point. Suh > Bradford. However, the Rams knew getting that QB play would have the biggest overall impact on the team.

#9 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,530
  • Reputation: 393
HUDDLER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 10:18 AM

Just reread the OP for the 3rd time and still have no idea what Tony Pike has to do with anything.

#10 CatMan72

CatMan72

    KEEP POUNDING

  • Joined: 04-January 09
  • posts: 15,549
  • Reputation: 2,798
SUPPORTER

Posted 01 March 2011 - 10:22 AM

trading away a first rounder for an undersized 2nd round DE doesn't scream safe. Looked like a reach when a team knew they were about to have a huge hole at DE.


Depends on how you look at it, missing on a guy in the 2nd round is a much less expensive mistake then missing on a guy in the first round.