Jump to content
Carolina Huddle

Sgt Schultz

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    640
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

594 Good

About Sgt Schultz

  • Rank
    NOT NEWB
  • Birthday 07/21/1961

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Santa Fe, NM

Recent Profile Visitors

1,485 profile views
  1. My problems with the idea of trading up, especially for a QB are: We need help almost everywhere. Our lines were ineffective, on both sides of the ball. At best, the rest of our defense is okay, and I think that is stretching it. We are deep nowhere. There is not one position I would be willing to say "we're set." The closest is at RB, where we have CMC and a bunch of people that would have probably paid to touch the ball last season. One big pick is not going to help much. We are not chasing a playoff run in 2020, as much as people would like to think otherwise. We need to approach building our roster strategically, not thinking we are only two or three players away. One big pick is not going to help that much, either. This draft has a lot of solid first round picks, especially for a team with enough needs that pure BPA probably works out well. There is depth beyond the first round (although that is depending on who is making our pick after the first round). If we spend a #3 pick on a QB, the expectation is going to be that he starts in the short term. Giving our weak OL the short shrift this offseason will just get a new QB pounded back there. Sound familiar? It would be repeating the past mistake. Outside of Burrow, there is not a QB I would risk a #3 or better pick on. Tua may prove out and have a long, productive career in the NFL. But, right now his durability at the NFL level is a risk. If bullet #1 was not true, he might be worth the risk with the idea he could sit for a year while we figure out the Cam equation. But, bullet #1 is true. For Tua, so is bullet #4, which increases the risk to him. If I were in the trading mood, it would be down if I could stay in the top 12 or so and get more picks. Again, depending on who is making those subsequent picks.
  2. 80 pages on Goggle Drive. Did he happen to mention how much Templeton went into this effort? However much it was, the first sip had to start a couple of hours before page one.
  3. Good stuff, MHS. I love the video....."I'm not the Mike." Hmm, do you take his word for it?
  4. I could well be wrong here, but I always got the impression Fox hated Moore. Then again, I think if it had been up to Fox, Delhomme would have remained the starter unless he came out with his passing arm actually cut off. So I think Fox had his finger on the Clausen trigger when the season started, and his lunacy in handling the concussion Moore suffered in the opening game tends to support that (support, not prove). The problem in trying to put any rationale to that situation, though, is it was pretty obvious early on that JR was flipping Fox the bird and Fox was returning the favor. Who was behind what gets pretty blurry in those situations, since everybody's primary objective is trying to put the screws to everybody else. Sounds like some of the people I work with about half the time, actually!
  5. Hey!!! You realize that my wife gave me one of those mail-in carbon dating kits for my last birthday? The Fire Marshal refused to allow the baker to put that number of candles on a cake. Away from the very poor attempts at humor. The problem with this whole situation is that it is like a soap opera. Whenever anybody says anything involving Cam, whether it is somebody whose paycheck comes from the Panthers or somebody on this board, let the spinning begin. Did you see that.....Tepper shifted his weight when he said they would evaluate Cam when he is healthy. That clearly means........... The reality is it means nothing. People are trying to piece together a puzzle based on pieces that may not even be part of the same puzzle. I know what I want, but it is based solely on the limits of what I know of a situation with a ton of variables. I freely accept what I would like to see out of this situation and what I will see may very well be vastly different. The Panthers organization probably knows what it wants, but be it moving forward with Cam, trading him, or playing him for one more season to evaluate and figure out what they are going to do going forward, the same variables apply. They don't even have the answer, so the whole mess is very up in the air......and they know more than I do. Cam probably knows what he wants, but again, variables that he probably does not have the answer to greatly shape the outcome. This horse was beaten to death a long time ago. If I am going to spend time wringing my hands over trying to figure out the future, especially when it involves something that even those in the middle of probably do not have a solid handle on, it will be the lottery numbers or where to invest our savings. This situation has fewer variables than the lotteries, but at least the variables pertaining to lotteries are accepted variables. Too many people think that if they spin words or speculate long enough, they will turn is variables into constants, when only the football field can do that (and it may not, either). Then again, my namesake's favorite saying is "I know nothing." On this situation, I am willing to accept that and wait. Oh, and BTW, what is wrong with The Onion? The reporting is just about as accurate as anybody else these days, and it at least provides some entertainment value. How can you go wrong with a headline like this: Increased Airtime Of Chantix Commercials Results In Ray Liotta Qualifying For Democratic Debate?
  6. I would not be willing to bring Dak on at the price he seems to be interested in. I have a relatively high opinion of him, but I don't think he is an elite QB. I'd place him at the bottom of the top third, or top of the middle third of QBs. He has talent. The problem is he is very hot and cold. And he often seems to cool off in games when he is needed most. He has yet to prove he is going to lead a team in clutch games. That may not be his fault, as the Cowboys as a group seem to fall into that trap. I think he has the potential to overcome that hurdle. But, I am not willing to bet $35M a year or whatever the number du jour is on that with him.
  7. Problem is he may not be worth enough right now in trade value to make the equation much different either way. If we are going to move on from Cam, last year was about the worst possible outcome. He was a question coming into the season, and nothing happened to answer that question. Even if he was mediocre last year, just playing the entire season would have been an answer.
  8. I agree with you on hanging onto him and seeing what he can do next season. And depending on how things go, if he looks good and some contender's starter goes down or somebody who is lacking at QB manages to go crazy, there may be options at or prior to the deadline if we want to go that way. Somebody has to play the position next year. The worse that somebody plays, the more critical it is to find THE starter quickly. If Cam can play as a healthy, 2020 version (I'm not buying the idea that he can recreate the 2015 version), we have the luxury of some time that can be used to address our other many needs while being selective about who the heir apparent is. The worst that can happen is either get nothing in return for Cam (he walks or can't stay healthy) or we win enough and move down in the draft. But, there is no rule or even trend that good starting QBs are only taken in the first five picks of a draft. As for losing a potential third round pick because Cam walks or can't stay healthy, our track record in those rounds is less than stellar, anyway. As long as Hurney is pulling the levers on draft picks, I don't consider mid and late round picks as assets of any great significance. Long story short, I don't see a big downside to suiting him up next year and letting the chips fall where they may. Tanking never works out the way a team hopes. Somebody is always going to naturally stink the place up better than anybody can design and execute incompetence.
  9. The fly in that ointment is his contract is up after this year. So, if the goal is to play him and increase his value, we either have to then extend him with a contract other teams will be willing to take or trade him by the deadline. Either might be doable, both have their own risks. In the "by the deadline" scenario we are looking for a team that either lost the starter to injury or thinks they are Cam away from making a run. If that does not work, then we are looking to thread the needle with a contract a healthy (but not 2015 level) Cam will command and what another team will take on.
  10. I am a long way from convinced Hill will ever be more than a novelty. Among everything else, he will be 30 by season's start and has to be considered a project. I don't know about anybody else, but I'm not interested in a 30-year-old project under center, Cam or no Cam. In fact, if we are rebuilding he fails the age test right out of the chute. Things could get interesting in NOLA. Bridgewater was decent in his starts when Brees was out, and I think he has interest around the league. Hill wants a shot at starting sooner rather than later (which, as I have indicated would have to be considered a grand experiment). They could wind up scrambling around looking for a backup, the way this is going. And from what I know of their cap situation, it will need to be a budget backup. Bridgewater should get much more serious interest than Hill. I could see Bridgewater in Indy, New England, or Vegas next year, and I am sure there are other teams interested in him. Then again, I can see almost any QB who is available and has any name recognition in Vegas next year. I saw somewhere that the Cardinals might be interested in Hill as a backup to Murray. I assume they would continue the novelty role, too.
  11. I started to comment on this the other day, then work intervened. People act like the number of players from a program that go onto NFL careers is somehow a good benchmark to determine how well a coach or coaches develop talent. There is an assumption in there that does not hold water, and you hit on it with the statement about not landing players who visited Oklahoma or Ohio State. If you are a good HS talent who people think has a shot at one day playing on Sundays, and you get offers from LSU, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Baylor, who is the odd program out? It may have something to do with coaching history, but it also has to do with exposure. If you are a starter at the first three, you are guaranteed to be seen by NFL decision makers. At Baylor, those decisions makers have to find you. If you are a marquee talent, they will, but for somebody that might be a day two or three draft choice, it might be the difference between being drafted or not. Schools like Baylor have more success getting players who probably will not be starters at more renown programs, but have a great shot at starting for them. And while we are on the subject, who has put more talent into the NFL than Nick Saban? Yet, how did he do at the next level? Here is a clue: the guy is 243-65-1 in college, 152-23 at Alabama and another 48-16 at LSU with a total of 6 National Championships. Yet he was basically a .500 coach in two season in the NFL and his second season was worse than his first (so not trending up in very limited data). Point is, there is very little correlation between the obvious benchmarks (wins or number of players who move to the next level) and how a coach will do in the NFL. In fact, if there was any consistent correlation between anything and NFL coaching success, the "hit rate" of HC hires would be a lot better than it is. I don't know if Rhule and company will pan out or not, but he was worth a shot. Counting us, there were at least two NFL organizations seriously interested in him, and the idea of a guy with a ton of NFL experience (McDaniels) who ultimately got passed over (maybe to his benefit with the Browns) did not thrill me. And sticking with Rivera, who had reached his expiration date here, and expecting different results was not a great option unless our motto was set to become "Commitment to Mediocrity."
  12. I am trying to figure out if there is a way I can unsee that image. I share Thomas' hopes. As we know, Rivera was nothing if not stubborn. Once a player gets in his doghouse, it almost takes an act of God to get them out.
  13. Since you feel so strongly, I’d recommend you quite watching it and give up all things related to it…..like posting on NFL and sports-related online forums.
  14. Well, as we are talking about a choice between two boobs here. But I like your idea better.
×
×
  • Create New...