SetfreexX

If Fields falls which I doubt take him, all the signs seem to point to him going at #3 to SF, some of the Mac Jones talk has cooled off. 

We'll know for sure what's what in 10 days. Quite honestly the roster is better now than when the season ended, the only key departure IMO is Curtis, who's role is the easiest to replace. Mike Davis played well, but so long as CMC is healthy it's not even close. 

QB (Fields / Lance) / OL (SeWell / Slater) / trade back for a top corner -- that is my line of thinking based on how the board may fall. If ATL cannot trade out of #4 I think they take Pitts, they have Matt locked in for two years, makes a lot of sense for them to add Pitts alongside Julio, and Ridley -- if that happens it's easily top 5 skill personnel. 

5 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

Can you read minds? How do you know they weren't all in with Teddy or thinking they are all in on Darnold? The Panthers signed Teddy for over 60 million. Cam was making less when he was a Panther. Going by the contract, they were all in on Teddy.

Just because the Jets haven't traded the pick yet doesn't mean they couldn't trade it draft day and still get a QB they want before the Panthers pick. The Panthers brain trust might have a different opinion than you do about Darnold. They might think he is a franchise guy.

The Panthers had a legit star caliber QB with a crap Oline. How well did that work out for them? How many back to back winning seasons did they have with that star QB? How many superbowls did that star QB win for them?

You're assuming other teams won't take that good OL late in the first or before the Panthers pick in the second.

Got to a Superbowl, and had an OROY at the position, the issues were the fact that the management under that time frame was Hurney / Gettleman -- which was overseen by an owner that was forced to sell the team because he was a sexual predator. 

They WASTED Cam's and Luke's prime, and Gettleman's ego blew up a team that went to the playoffs in 2013, and again after a 2015 SB appearance. Ron and them trotted out Byron Bell, and DG drafted the likes of Vernon Butler, Kelvin Benjamin, etc while other options were available to stabilize the OL. For all the ''Hog Molly'' talk we didn't really do poo on the OL outside Turner, and Moton. 

Edmund Kugbila, Amini Silatolu, I can't even think of one LT drafted during Cam's time aside from Little, and we see how that's gone. This team was mismanaged top to bottom, EVEN when they had at least 2 HOF'ers on the roster, arguably three if you include Olsen, it was the biggest piece of inept work I've ever seen. 

And that is the only reason Ron has a job, Cam / Luke got him those COTY awards, we didn't develop anyone behind the starters so when injuries hit we failed. That was the achilles heel beyond shitty roster management, the blind favoritism to vets. 

16 minutes ago, CanePantherHornet said:

I swear people only want him just because he's been hyped as the 2nd best QB for like a year now. 

 

There is a reason he is falling though, and that's because he has been greatly overrated. He played with elite talent and still underperformed. Ohio State QBs are always system babies. When you look at his highlights its mostly him just arm punting it to people who are wide ass open, which is not a good thing.

So the RPO heavy offense of Clemson and stationary targets is a better metric for QB success. Or losing to Coastal Carolina in the case of WIlson....?

You're drafting the talent, not the school, or the scheme, if that's the case Alabama QB's don't do well in the NFL yet there are plenty here that are all over Jones.

I like Fields and Lance as they possess all the traditional QB tools + they add elite NFL athleticism at that position. Playing 11 v 11 is better than 11 v 10. 

6 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

Much better organizations usually have an older established vet at QB, a better overall team, and can afford to let a guy sit for a year or two. The Panthers aren't in that position.

Being all in on Darnold is no more dangerous than being all in on an unproven rookie draft pick.

New England and Green Bay had established vet starters and could afford to slowly bring a guy along. And exactly how many of those New England guys have been successes outside of New England's system?

What if the staff think Darnold is a bona fide NFL franchise QB and don't see the need to draft a QB? What if they draft a rookie who plays and he ends up beyond mediocre?

LT is such an important spot to get right that IF YOU DON'T HAVE ONE, when you're in position to take one, you do so if you believe in him. Now replace LT with CB, guard, center, safety, etc and you have the current Panthers. The FO may believe Darnold is a franchise QB. If that is the case and Sewell or Slater is there, the team should take whichever is there instead of trading back.

If Darnold WAS a franchise QB he wouldn't have been available for what boils down to a future 2nd. If he was this sure thing NYJ is the perfect position have cashed in that pick for a kings ransom. I covered this already. 

QB is the single most important position to get right on a team, OL is a UNIT, having a good LT is great BUT it is not the end all be all. This day and age you NEED a legit star caliber QB. There were several teams that make the playoffs year in and out with middle of the pack OL's -- BUT they have a QB. 

Aside from protecting your QB being able to get after one is also just as important. If a top QB prospect and SeWell or Slater are the choice you take the QB. Good OL are available at the top of Day 2, and guess where we pick....the top of Day 2. 

When you get the QB right, you're in a better position to get everything else right, then it will come down to competent roster management, we will ALSO have the money to BUY a LT if that's the case 2022 forward. Plenty of options to solidify the OL, less options to solidify QB with a top 10 prospect. 

10 minutes ago, run-run-pass-punt said:

Have you noticed the bust rate of NFL picks? It's a lottery, and even the "experts" are wrong all. the. time. Part of the reason I'm very happy to trade down if the option presents itself. You mitigate risk with more chances at hitting on the non-busts.

That's why you trade down top of the 2nd and 3rd where the gap between players is larger, or really in the mid to late 1st. There's less busts at the top, and QB is a 50/50 proposition. 

However; QB is such an important spot to get right that IF YOU DON'T HAVE ONE, when you're in position to take one, you do so if you believe in him. 

Fields has the resume', and to me Lance is worth it knowing you have a starter in Darnold that you're not committed to long term. 

9 minutes ago, mbarbour21 said:

I would love to get Fields or Lance. The problem I have with selecting them tho is that everyone claims the Jets didn’t build around Darnold like they should to put him in a position to be successful. If we grab a QB when we could trade back, I feel like we are passing up a good chance to put Darnold in a great position. A first round selection and an extra early to mid 2nd rounder could be huge in providing Darnold with the protection and weapons he should have gotten with the Jets. Plus, adding defensive help always benefits the offense as well.

WR - DJ Moore (Emerging Elite WR) / Robby Anderson (One of the best vertical threats in the league - has rapport with Sam) / David Moore is capable, and we're like to add a rooki

HB - CMC (Best all around back in the NFL), depth can be added Day 2 / 3 of the draft

TE - Dan Arnold is an emerging vertical threat, and Ian was surprisingly good when CAM was throwing to him

OL was middle of the pack last year even with all the injuries, stands to reason we will improve even if slightly -- people gotta stop acting like quality OL is only available in the 1st. Some of our best OL have come on day 2 (Trai / Moton / Norwell UDFA)

--------------------------------------------------------------

There is plenty around Sam to succeed while still making the best move for this team moving forward IF a top QB prospect falls. 

Very little need to worry about that, plus our cap space moving forward is JAX Jaguars'esque

44 minutes ago, Panthera onca said:

Seems like San Fran may have their eyes on Fields now. The Mac talk may have been an elaborate smokescreen.

No need for a smoke screen they have the #3 pick, and for all accounts #1 and #2 are locked in. Fields isn't going #2. 

The Wilson love / hype  is too real, right now Fields is being drug through the mud similar to how Cam was, and Lance coming from a smaller school / less competition you're not really hearing too much about him. 

40 minutes ago, The Huddler said:

Im happy we got Darnold, but it seems to me we put the backup plan in place before we truly got desperate after the draft. I don't think we are counting on them to be there at 8, but will gladly take them if they are there. 

 

Thats why we are waiting on Darnold's 5th year option

Common sense does exist, this ^^^^ this right here ^^^^. There is NO REASON to be sold on Darnold as OUR and here is the simple logic -- New York LET HIM GO!!!

Common Reasons Why:

1) Well Adam Gase held him back, ok well Adam Gase is gone so what's the excuse in NY now?

2) Well we get Zach Wilson on a rookie deal, ok well Darnold only costs 4M in 2021, and has an option at just 18.5M IF you activate the option. So you could sell the pick and have a ton of cap to BUILD around Darnold IF they thought he was the guy even at the 5th year option price which would put him in the bottom two thirds or half of QB salaries. 

All I'm saying is IF he was worth believing in as a franchise guy NYJ wouldn't have let him go so cheaply, I'm not sorry it is what it is. To me he's an ARM talent upgrade over TB who's willing to throw down field. But I am nowhere near sold on him as answer. He's a bandaid until proven otherwise. 

It's why you take the QB if they're there, Darnold can start and play knowing in order to get paid here or elsewhere he has to ball out. That keeps us off of the hook for his salary while a Fields or Lance gets to learn the NFL ropes -- odds are we're around .500 ish with Darnold which means we'll still be in position to improve the OL in the 2022 draft or in FA if we're unable to do so this year. 

There is no reason to think at the 8th spot in Rd 2 we won't be able to upgrade the LT position, and I don't hate -- Erving / Little / Scott, but would like to see it improved none the less, Okung is out there as well as Eric Fisher as well. We have plenty of options at LT via the draft and after. 

To me it's one of these guys if they fall then SeWell if available, if all three are gone I'm looking at the board and I'm willing to trade back at that point. 

38 minutes ago, CPcavedweller said:

Devonta Smith or those two? When we just traded for Darnold? And still have Bridgewater and his cap hit? I'd say we are done with QB's for now.

Two gloves will be traded or released, he won't be around. We're not done at QB, we have the cap to take the hit on a June 1st designation if we can't find a partner. 

Whether it's on social media or in comments spread out through other posts there seems to be many who are OKAY with rolling forward with Darnold as ''THE'' guy on the roster. I have no issue with the trade for Darnold as IMO it was a relatively cheap deal, a 6th this year and a future 2nd & 4th can all be recovered one way or another, he only costs about 4M this year and we have until AFTER the draft to pick up the 5th year option. (Many sports news outlets still don't realize we haven't picked it up yet, and I don't think it's for a smokescreen, I think it's smart to wait and know what the draft brings)

Given the current draft / QB climate I understand the move, it allows them to not have to force the issue by reaching on a prospect that's not considered a top 4 QB later on in the draft, as bringing in a Mond or Newman or whoever while you have Darnold doesn't make a ton of sense. But Fields & Lance have a different level of potential compared to Darnold IMO. Darnold has ''all the tools'' but there's nothing about his game that could make him ''special''. 

I think if one of these guys falls, or potentially is in range between the 5th and our 8th, I would not be surprised at all to see us move up.

(KC traded the 27th, their 3rd in that same class and a future 1st to jump from 27 to 10 -- Compensation wise to jump 17 spots, that is not a lot -- moving from 8 to 5 or 6 if they decided to IMO is not out of the question. Swap 1sts, add a day 2 or 3 pick and a future 1st.)

I did not get any ''he's our guy'' vibes from the pressers from Fitt, and Rhule. They were both complimentary of his talent, but they do that for all acquisitions Coach / GM speak. 

So what are your thoughts...?

I'd like to think we look similar to this heading into the season -

• Moore / Anderson / Moore #2 / Rookie with similar skill set to Curtis

Guys like Kirkwood, Bayless, and even this guy I don't buy as ''sure ins'' to make it. More so than anything Kirkwood knew the offense as he was in NO, Bayless & Bryant are slow UDFA's with what seem to be good hands & ball skills. 

Biggest question for them is can they separate consistently and not have to always catch in traffic even though they seem to possess that ability. Micah Simon and the 4.3s speed also has me intrigued. 

Just happened across this, just a guy to keep an eye on likely for culture / camp body, may be an interesting guy to keep up with -- 6'3'' / 205

Confirmed -- Rhule said the 5th year option has NOT been picked up yet, May 3rd is the deadline, that is BIG news!!

Allows them to take a QB, and only have Sam at his cost of 4M ish for just this season if the draft falls our way. 

Gentlemen, are me looking at the makings of a playoff roster....share your thoughts below.

Offense -

QB - Darnold / Walker / Grier / Stevens / TB to TBD

HB - CMC / Bonnafon / Smith / Cannon / Clark the UDFA from the workout

FB - N/A (Maybe the TE Colin Thompson as needed)

WR - DJ Moore / Anderson / David Moore / Kirkwood / Zylstra / Young projects

TE - Arnold / Thomas / Sullivan

OL - Erving / Elflein / Paradis / Miller / Moton -- Key Depth - Little / Daley / Scott

---------------------------------------------

Defense - 

DL - Brown / Gross-Matos / Fox / Roy -- Could see KK return, or a rookie addition

Offball LB - Shaq / Perryman / Carter Jr -- Luvu / Orr / Johnston as depth currently

EDGE - Burns / Reddick / Haynes / Miller  

CB - Jackson / Bouye / Melvin / Pride / ST Oliver III

S - Chinn / Burris / Franklin / Robinson - We have some unknown depth atm (Would not be surprised to see Boston back if the draft doesn't fall our way)

1) Fields or Lance falls to #8 -- take them, Sam is still a huge ''?'' adding a LT doesn't resolve the ''?'' that he is, don't pass on the talent that Fields / Lance possess + up to 5 years of QB play at that low of a cost, even if we exercise / have exercised Darnold's 5th year option, for a future QB needy team he'd be cheap if we had to deal. Then use the 2nd, and possibly the 3rd to trade back and add additional Day 2 & 3 picks. 

(We're in a great position to do that since we are at the top of each round)

2) If Fields or Lance fall to #5 or #6 -- Swap 1sts, and offer the third, and a future late pick; our 2nd is high enough to trade back this year and add a 3rd or early 4th back to keep our pick count at the same for 2021(7 picks)

3) No top tier QB's available -- Take BPA at #8, I'd be fine with using the 2nd round pick as bait to trade back to add an additional Day 2 pick and would use that to draft Mond / Newman, guys we know could use 1-2 seasons to develop. 

I'm not too big a fan of other options, though there are more, these are simply my preference. 

6 minutes ago, therealmjl said:

Yes

 

Will, and HAVE aren't the same. From all I've read its not. They have until after the draft. MAY 3rd Is the deadline. 

1 hour ago, woahfraze said:

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

I think the EXPECTATION to pick up the 5th year was floated out there by the media, but I haven't seen it made official, would be in the team's best interest to wait until the deadline May 3rd which is the Monday after the draft. 

This way if we draft a QB we can forgo his option, and if we don't we still have the option to not commit to it. I personally wouldn't commit either way because he's not getting market value money, and if he's gone in FA we sign or look to the draft. I'd rather keep that QB money low until we draft a guy, and just build the best total roster. (See SF / MIA, as recent examples of this) we can be bad until we're in position to get ''OUR" guy. Doesn't matter how much you want to win if you don't have the pieces, we had #3 locked up, we could have rested starters Weeks 16 & 17 -- the team did this to themselves. 

I understand the morale, but we saw PHI secure #6 Week 17 pulling Hurts. We see examples every year, and we also see it not work out so no matter what you do there's opportunity to fail. A lot of it is just getting lucky, see JAX as NYJ fell into enough wins to lose the #1 overall pick. 

TB IMO set up his own exit after the MIN game and blaming a call coming in late as the reason he missed a wide open receiver directly in front of his face. 

Then trying to dive over the pile in GB only to fumble, and the 4th and 9 in the final moments of a game where he just checks it down to a 2 yard drag. 

There's several examples, IMO they bought into the Saints hype, he looked better on a better team, I dunno who was responsible for the money, but if you're paying a guy that much they need to at times be the reason you win; especially at QB. 

He's a game manager with below avg arm talent -- Darnold has the potential to be more with + arm talent, this is a step in the right direction, but I don't think it's viewed as the answer long term either. 

Just watch the presser, TLDR

1) We can draft a QB if one falls that we like

2) We can move up, down, or stay put

This is what Fitterer said yesterday, also OL / DL / CB are points of interest in the draft in general. 

3 minutes ago, BrianS said:

That's nowhere near what it would cost to move to 5.  Just to get close to moving with Cincy, we'd need to offer our 1st and 2nd this year.  Going off strict value we might get a 3rd or 4th back from Cincy, but because other teams will be calling Cincy and because the pick is a QB, in your scenario we'll probably have to offer 1 & 2 and get nothing else or perhaps offer future considerations.

I am not advocating for this scenario.  Just saying that in presenting scenarios we need to be realistic.

8 >>> 5 is not nearly the jump from where SF was (12) to get to #3. We're talking a 9 spot jump versus 3. 

Pick 5 is worth - 1700

Pick 8 is worth - 1400 and our 3rd is worth 225 (1625)

If this required our 4th (68) or 5th (29.4)

Those are throw ins when talking about a QB, and we can make up for some of that via trading back at the top of Rd 2. Realistic enough for you 

(I looked into all of this before when talking about a potential trade to get to 3 or 5 weeks before SF pulled the trigger -- that was the scenario for us that was going to require a future 1st -- IF we did that to jump three spots, that would be overkill, and to be fait given the market it COULD happen, but when talking about the points; the cost isn't large to move up three spots)

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Not until draft night.  The hand-wringing over all 4 QBs being gone is a bit overblown.  It certainly could happen, but I say the odds that either Lance or Fields is still there is higher than both being gone.  That's why we wait.  We know Sam's market and we certainly can trade a 3rd. 

This ^^^ IMO the media is using the availability of QBs to drive media consumption whether it's for clicks, or tv ratings. 

The value teams would have to give up can't be overlooked, we're not the only teams with holes. Each of these teams has a QBs in place with NFL experience / talent. 

Locke on a DEN team that's not decimated by injuries could make a push as a WC team. OAK and LAC still have a ways to go as well the main comp is KC. 

Fitz & Allen in WAS seem like the move this year, doesn't make a ton of sense to trade UP for a guy that will be the 3rd QB. If it was just Allen I could buy this a bit more.

Newton in NE with what they've done could also push for a playoff spot, and given theirs woes in the draft in recent years it makes more sense for them to keep acquiring picks so they have more chances to hit.

Like I said, it all boils down to price, will teams want to pay the cost to move UP for the 4th QB. IF Fields or Lance gets to #5 I could see us trying to jump, swapping firsts and adding our 3rd to move up 3 spots. 

We could easily trade back at the top of Rd 2, swapping 2nd's and adding a 3rd early 4th to keep our total pick count the same depending on the value.  

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

Yeah, I just mocked this scenario because if 'our QB' is gone at #8, this almost certainly will go down.

You talking about what I posted, or something else?

Need to simply say, I'd rather draft a mid round prospect like Mond over trading for Darnold. He only has the 5th year option left at this point, and that is IMO too high a cost for a player that remains in question. 

If we can't get Fields / Lance at #8 or maybe a trade up to #5 if ATL takes Pitts, I'd like to see us take SeWell or Slater in the 1st, and then look to bring in Mond or Newman on Day 2 with a solidified OL in front of him. 

OL - Sewell or Slater / Elflein / Paradis / Miller / Moton -- Key Reserves -- Erving / Little / Scott 

WR - Moore / Robby / Moore / our depth behind this

TE - Arnold / Thomas

HB - CMC / Draft Pick

QB - Teddy / Mond / Newman

------------------------------------

I think I'd like the potential of this collection of players, especially if we're able to trade back in Rounds 2 & 3 and use the additional picks to make use of taking a QB and extending our depth in other areas. 

Not to mention in this scenario TB is likely the stop gap QB to give the rookie time to get acclimated. 

Yeah ATL >> CAR trade is nigh impossible. One can only hope the asking price is too high. If number 3 got a swap of 1st's, two future firsts, and a 3rd -- you'd have to imagine that the price will be similar. 

The question is will teams want to spend that much on the ''4th best QB''. I think that's what it will boil down to. DEN would make the most sense as they (ATL) could move down to #9 and still acquire a great player, and the cost cost for DEN would be a little less that what it may take for WAS, or NE to jump. 

I also see a trade with an NFC opponent unlikely so WAS seems more of a longshot -- DEN / NE are the teams to watch IMO. 

JAX - Lawrence

NYJ - Wilson

SF via MIA - Fields / Lance / Jones

ATL >> DEN - Fields / Lance / Jones

CIN - 

MIA

DET

CAR

DEN >> ATL

--------------------------------------------------------

In this scenario with four picks before us at #8 several great players could still be available, so no matter what happens we will get a good prospect. UNFORTUNATELY it will likely lead to another year of mediocre QB play, while the roster / coaching seems good enough to keep us out of the top 5. 

Pitts

Chase

SeWell

Parsons

Slater