AU-panther

Impatient? If anythign he has been too patient. You could make the argument that he kept RR too long, Hurney too long, and a very good chance Rhule too long. Could we have took a super conservative approach, of course. I was one of the biggest advocates for it, I would have started Grier, never signed Teddy, never signed Sam, and had a lot more draft picks and cap space. Just because you don't do the super conservative route doesn't automatically make you impatient, there is a middle ground there. Football coaches and GMs get paid to try and win, although most of us didn't' agree with Teddy and Sam I'm guessing they thought they were good ideas. That is a sign of a desperation that is more of a sign of just bad choices. If anythign he was probably let his football people do their job to a fault.

Humbled on what? Signing Teddy? Signing Sam? I seriously doubt either of those were his ideas. My guess is his "football people" came up with those ideas, and like almost any owner he was probably heavily involved in the discussion for said QB, but I don't see him playing GM like a Snyder or Jones is often thought of. I

So Tepper is the one looking making sure that the team doesn't do anything desperate, which is so much different than the narrative that a lot of people around here want to create. Also, he seems to be part of the decision process, but at the same time he lets his people do their jobs. He seems to be more concerned in making sure the process is well thought out.

There are teams that have a draft and don't develop approach?

I actually like this pick where we picked him. He is almost the best compromise among the QB prospects. He has more "tools" than say Pickett, but then he has better accuracy metrics than some of the guys with the big arms like Howell and Willis. His biggest question mark is the fact he ran such a limited system, not only single reads but pre-determined reads. Was that because he can't do more or because the system didn't' ask him to do more? In the third round it's a low risk play that gives a coach some tools to work with.

It doesn't even have to be that direct, or even Tepper picking sides. It could be more Tepper setting a directive. Basically it could be as easy as Tepper telling both of them that we aren't overspending on a FA QB like we have in the past, and also we aren't over drafting a QB in the draft. Outside of that, you 2 figure out how to build this team the right way.

Brandon Smith is a high RAS score guy who fits the profile of what has been drafted in previous years when Rhule was supposedly more in charge. Ultimately, I think a lot of people around here are choosing to believe what they want to believe with probably none of us really knowing for sure, this year or in previous years. Everyone wants all of this to be so concrete when in reality the chances are that it is not. There is a very good chance that Fitt might have made some of the final calls on some of the players last year and Rhule some this year. Just because Rhule has "final say" doesn't mean he didn't go with any of Fitts idea this year. Likewise Fitt might be running more of the show this year but that might not stop Rhule from getting his way on a certain pick.

There is actually a third scenrio that could be in play here: Fitterer and Morgan could be running the show, not Rhule, based on direction from Tepper.

Doesn't matter at this point, but for all of the armchair GMs, did we pick the correct LT? By most accounts Ekwonu was regarded at the best run blocker, Cross the best pass blocker, and Neal was the most athletically gifted. Ekwonu seemed to be the top tackle on most boards, although I did see Cross on some, namely PFF. You could make an argument for Ekwonu based on the fact his floor might be higher in that worst case he is a great guard. You could make an argument for Cross based on the fact pass blocking is the most important aspect of tackle play in today's NFL. You could make an argument for Neal based on the shear potential. Chances are, all three of these guys won't turn out great, would you have picked a different one? Also the fact that James Campen is on our staff now does make me feel better about the pick

I would totally agree with this. I give the Ravens a lot of credit for their trade of Hollywood Brown. They basically spent a 1st round pick on him, got 3 years of production out of him, and flipped him for another 1st round pick. Worst case they take the $20M+ they save by not paying him and use that to pay a FA WR.

We picked a very highly rated prospect, at probably our second greatest area of need, that also happens to be a highly valuable position, that's never a bad thing. I also agree that you would think his floor is a very good guard, but I also thought the same about Greg Robinson in 2014 so you never know. Overall it was probably the best decision we could make. In theory could a trade down might have netted more assets long term, probably, but there is no telling what was really offered. For a front office and coaching staff that at times seems desperate it was a very sound decision.

There is very good chance though that they don't have all 3 LTs rated as top shelf. Us fans would be happy with any of the top-3 LTs, but in reality, the Panthers and most likely other teams might have a gap between OT2 and OT3. I've said for awhile that going D is a very real possibility. All the QB talk might be smokescreen, OT1 and OT2 could very easily go before we pick, we might not be crazy about OT3. Also BC might factor into this. We might start convincing ourselves that he can be a decent LT. The fact Rhule is probably trying to win now might play into this also. What helps us win more this year, going from BC at LT to OT3 or adding a stud DE?

I see both sides, I really do. You don't want to waste a pick on a guy you think has zero chance of making it but at some point a QB is almost always a riskier choice that one or more non-QBs. For those that don't want to gamble on a QB this year, did you feel the same about Cam? Also in the last 10 years how many QB would you have been ok gambling on? Luck, Lawrance... Even though we were not in position to pick one of them, they went before our pick. In the last 10 years how many QBs that were available to pick at our spot were you willing to gamble on? Very true, fans have convinced themselves they are trading a 100% of being great for a 1% chance of being great. Also people need to remember that although the LT probably does have a greater chance of being good, but even if they are they really only help your team a little bit compared to what being right on the QB does.

and how exactly did he make the impact?? Just because you made a tackle close to the line of scrimmage doesn't mean he is making a big impact if another LB would have made the same. Under your logic if he makes a tackle 2 yards past the LOS he is making more of an impact than if he making a tackle 5 yards past the LOS. That is incomplete logic. What if that tackle he makes at 2 yards past the LOS another LB would have made one yard past the LOS then its not really impressive. Then what if that tackle 5 yards past the LOS another safety would have made 6 yards past the LOS? All of a sudden the tackle further back is more impressive. You can't just look at where a tackle is made to judge a player. There is so much more that goes into it. Its all relative to how a replacement player would have produced in the same situation.

More solo tackles in year 2. More tackles for loss in year 2. Same number of sacks. Same QB hits. The numbers don't back up the idea that he was more productive year 1.

Oustside of two freak plays what else did he do so much better in his rookie season?

That is my point exactly, you are rating entire seasons off of 2 splash plays you happened to see in tv. What about the other 900 snaps? Recovering fumbles and returning them for TDS are freak plays. He might go an entire career without getting another one regardless of hat position he plays. Outside of those plays his stats were very close. If he was invisible to anyone it’s just because they were not watching.

Great post. Also look at his PFF grade from 2020 and 2021 and also his run defense grade vs pass defense grade. Fans are stupid, they hear the announcers talk about Chinn leading rookies in tackles his rookie year and then see a few missed coverages his second year and form these absolute opinions that often far from reality. His tackle totals are actually close, and in reality tackles by themselves are a poor stat to judge a player by. Tackles are usually a product of position and defensive alignment. You have to ask yourself did he make a tackle a tackle another safety would or wouldn’t have? Also did he make the tackle earlier than another safety? Or maybe he actually made a yard later? At that point it’s a negative stat. Just because he has a high tackle total doesn’t mean he is great against the run. Very possible he tackles well in space but might have trouble getting off blocks.

Nice throw. Fans like to see the long bombs, but honestly some of the other top guys can make that throw (60-65 yard completion) Where Howell really separates himself from some of the other guys in the draft is on some of the out routes. Personally I want to like Howell a lot. I think he has one of the best arms in the draft, clearly is tough, and athletic enough not to be a liability based on the rushing load he took on this year. My only concern, and I honestly haven't watched him as much as others, are some of the advanced accuracy metrics on him. If a QB struggles when everyone goes well, that can be a bit of a red flag. Maybe his O-line was so bad last year he was a bit jumpy when he did have time? I'm sure you can probably speak to that better than most of us since you follow him so closely.

At first I was thinking it was just because of Watson but he was traded March 20th, and CMC restructured March 22?

No its not. If it was then why did the Chiefs lets Hill walk? Or Packers let Adams walk? Great players leave teams all the time and its because of the salary cap. The only people who think the cap is a myth are those that don't understand it. With that being said most teams, most years, have slack build into their contracts that they can create extra cap space with. That is the restructuring I talked about it earlier, or they can cut/trade players to create space. So these numbers that fans see for available cap space are often very misleading.

Thats not true, rookies don't take as much as people think. People add up all of the salaries of the rookies and think that is how much you need and it doesn't work that way. You have to remember those rookies are replacing contracts that are already on the team. So a 5th round pick will make around $800k but he will replace a guy making $600k so you that doesn't really add much. The only picks that really add much to your needed cap space are your 1st and 2nd rounders. Everyone else is getting paid close to league minimum which is the same as your current players. Also we don't have a 2nd.

That is funny and sad all at the same time. Hurney did it because he had to, usually because overspent in previous years. This situation is different. We didn't have to do this, unless we are strongly considering adding someone that we need the space for.

According to overthecap.com we are first in cap space available in the league with roughly $34m in available cap space. NFL Salary Cap Space | Over The Cap At first glance this seems to be a good thing, but people need to realize that the reason we have the most cap space is because we have pretty much restructured everyone on the team that has a base salary of any size outside of Sam Darnold. The next highest base salary is Cam Erving at only $4m. For those that don't know the most common way for teams to create cap space is to restructure players. You do this by converting base salary to a bonus and prorating it over future years, up to 5 years. For example if a player has an $11m base salary in the current year their cap hit is $11m. If you convert $10m into a singing bonus you can then account for that $10m over a max of 5 years. That would lower their current cap hit to $3m ($1m base salary + $2m (which is the $10m spread over 5 years)). Basically you have just created $8m of cap space in the current year. While there are teams with less listed cap space then us, in reality they have a lot more available cap space because they have several players that have high base salaries that they could always restructure. For example the bears could easily create another $35-$40m in cap space if they wanted to. The Steelers could create another $30m or so. The Ravens could get $40-50m more. My point is we are almost fully leveraged, the credit cards are maxed so to speak. Why do teams do this? Teams don't like to restructure if they don't have to. Why would you ever take non guaranteed salary and guarantee it? Teams do this whey they have to. If they are over the cap they have to, for example the Saints most years. Or if they are right at the cap they might restructure a few guys so they have a little bit of cushion to go into the year, just incase you have to sign someone because of injuries, but usually not to the point of $30m of space. Another reason a team might do this is if they plan on signing or trading for someone. I'm not saying we are trading for Jimmy G (or Baker), but that $30m in cap space we have created would allow us to take on his salary, sign our rookies, and still leave a little bit of cushion for the season. None of know for sure what is going to happen but the money says we are looking to sign a vet QB and then draft a non-QB (hopefully LT). I could even see a scenario where we trade down on draft night and use those extra picks to trade for one of the vets.

What were their OT rankings last year? Also what big boards do you feel are good?