bythenbrs

I don’t think anyone on the board has proposed paying him starter money. Cap friendly back up money only.

Starr 2.0, come on down…

Question wasn’t directed to me but, with no other QB’s on the roster that have shown backup or bridge QB potential, don’t you have to resign Sam to a cap friendly 1 or 2 year contract? If team cuts him, we enter training camp with Corral, a draft pick and what FA QB? Who out there is a better ‘budget friendly’ alternative? Carr? Minshew?

Not accusing you, for clarification. Some others on this board though…

I don’t think anyone is arguing Sam is the long term answer. With so many needs exposed, I am in fear of the team making the ill advised San Fran trade, just to get Young or Stroud. We are not a QB away from going deep into the playoffs on a consistent basis. We still need at least one, maybe two more drafts to plug the holes that were glaringly exposed today. Keep Sam, cut Sam, whatever, but for those others arguing to trade up, for the love of all that is holy, NO.

This was a team loss, full stop. If you believe that Sam was the singular cause for our loss, go ahead and pull the trigger, and trade away a boatload of draft picks for the first or second draft pick.

Our offer? Brian Burns, straight up…

[mic drop]

Are we talking about Tom or Gisele?

He may also be facing SEC charges for pimping FTX. It’s a stretch to get a conviction but, that may not stop the SEC from trying. Even if cleared or settled, the time, cost of defense and attendant emotional angst would make anyone look and feel a little gaunt.

I just had an epiphany. Maybe, and I’m just spit ballin’ here, having a real NFL o-line, a strong ground game and a scheme that better fits the player’s strengths and weaknesses can turn a ‘hopeless, lost cause’ into a serviceable, marginally productive game manager QB. That’s wild…

Reich as OC Re-sign Darnold to two year, cap friendly deal; assumes no major regression last two games. Darnold is your bridge QB while rookie draft pick and Corral are developed; two years to allow Corral and draft pick to develop without throwing them to the wolves too soon. If one excels after just one year, sweet. Re-sign Foreman (2 years) and Bozeman (3 years). Levis / Richardson - 1A / 1B Round 2.1 needs to be best TE available that can run routes and catch a football Round 2.2 DE or DT [Starr 2.0, come on down] Round 3 DE or DT; double dipping (yes, our run defense is that deficient) Round 4.1 IL that can be future C (eventual Bozeman replacement) Round 4.2 LB

If the shell fits…

Plus, he’s a Panther alum and a Maryland boy so, I gotta pull for him. ”Fear the Turtle!”

There is no substitute for actual game day experience calling plays. Reich has this. Bring him home.

I love personal redemption stories. Sam may never put a team on his back and singlehandedly carry it to a win but, subject to laying an egg in the last two games, if he continues to play like this, he could become a competent backup or even a bridge QB for the Panthers. And, if not here, someone else will give him that opportunity. Would be a shame to drop kick him to the curb at the end of the season, right when he is figuring out how to win and we now have a real NFL o-line to protect him, and a vastly improving run game to support him. It would be the Panther thing to do, to release him and he blooms [modestly] somewhere else. His ceiling may be a lite beer version of Geno Smith or Ryan Tannehill but, for a backup or bridge QB, that would be enough. So, two more games left to evaluate his progress.

And at this point, we know nothing about the future OC/staff of the Panthers. I’m of the opinion that OC (scheme) and staff (development) are 50% of the success or failure of any QB that we may draft, in any round.

My mistake. I see you did not start the thread. My apology.

Not to nitpick but, if you’re eating sushi, you’d like it raw, straight off the boat.

It makes me tremble…

Don’t sit on the fence. Tell us how you really feel.

Rather odd then that you would start a post with a link to an article that promotes that very thought. One could be forgiven for thinking you were in general agreement with the premise of the article, no?

Well run organizations do not let employees choose their supervisors. You may recognize that your own multivariate assessment coincides with the popular opinion of employees but, that is just happy coincidence when it occurs. If you make the right selection of a different candidate on qualifications, the employees will buy in eventually.

I should have added a little more text to make my meaning more clear. I am applauding your willingness to speak your mind, when so many Darnold haters are prowling around here.