Mr. Scot

Not solidifying our line would absolutely be a mistake, and given that 1) it's something both Fitterer and Rhule have pledged to do this offseason and 2) it's an oft repeated one already, it would be a tough one to forgive.

Lance over Sewell or Slater would be insane. You could conceivably make an argument for Fields at least, but not Lance.

If they repeat those mistakes, then yes I absolutely can.

Heard that before too. Each time we have a chance at finally solidifying our offensive line, we find an excuse not to. Then we wonder why we are where we are.

Like we did just two years ago? How many times in the past has this team thought they could get a left tackle in a later round?

Think of it this way... Would you prefer to have a starting quarterback and a starting left tackle or a starting quarterback, a backup quarterback and no left tackle?

Then why not help him out by taking, say, a left tackle? (especially given that you don't currently have one)

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers. Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing?

By getting a higher draft pick than them next year?

This would confirm that the picks traded are not conditional.

Here's the thing: The Panthers aren't looking for CAMS REPLACEMENT. Some fans might be, but the Panthers are not. They're looking for a starting quarterback. And given the offense that we run, that quarterback's playing style might look a lot more like Drew Brees than Cam Newton.

You're not accounting for trade ups though.

Millet?

FYI: Atlanta is reportedly getting multiple offers for the number four pick. If there was any thought of dissuading teams from trading up, I'd say it's not working.

I'll just throw this here... Some years back, we drafted a guy who talked about "bad intentions".

Relevant to this discussion... I know some folks are still hoping that one of the top quarterbacks drops to the 8th pick. But the closer we get to the Draft, the more that sounds like a long shot.

Oh yeah, we also signed somebody else.

I think they were going to get rid of Bridgewater regardless.

Honestly, I don't think any of it was. I don't buy the notion that it's a "desperation" trade either. Breer confirmed that we've been discussing this with the Jets since mid-February. It was always an option.

Actually thought there was going to be some kind of comparison between the two in here. I was going to offer that Sam Darnold has never fumbled while slamming his face into anybody's butt.

Fair. I still don't feel like we have a firm read on Matt Rhule either, but I can be happy he isn't Ron Rivera.

Looking at the general discussion on Darnold, I can tell you there's one thing I really really wish more people understood or at least considered. Bad teams have good players. Players being a part of bad teams doesn't automatically make them bad. Archie Manning was a great quarterback who was part of a lot of sh-t teams in New Orleans, and that's just one of numerous examples. I don't know whether Darnold is going to work out with us or not, but having a guy suddenly look a lot better when he left a bad team is pretty common (Ryan Tannehill is far from the only example).

All this said, I do think it's valid to take a moment and be happy that we're not being run by Marty Hurney anymore.

I remember comment from years ago where someone said "intellectuals are people who study what others do naturally'. The thing about analytics is that they're used to measure individuals, when as often as not it's more accurately a team measure. Take completion percentage. There are way too many variables on any given play to use completion percentage as a true measure of how good a quarterback is. That's why I prefer true personnel evaluation to looking at a spreadsheet.