ForJimmy

That’s a bold conclusion you have come to about that song? They must think highly of themselves to think that song is about them at all.

Because if the top 5 guys go early, other teams may jump in on Darnold starting a bidding war. Fitts said he wanted to address a need before the draft so we have more flexibility during it. Like I said earlier if the top guts are gone before 8, I’ll be very happy we made that trade.

I think he prevents them from acting desperate. If one happens to fall to then they love, I wouldn’t rule it out...

Yeah for me it’s Fields or LT. I’m just stating we don’t know what they want or who they like. They met a huge need with Darnold, but that just prevents them from acting desperate for a signal caller. If one they love falls on their laps it not crazy to think they will draft him.

Unless they don’t think Lance will be there at 8 and can’t afford to trade multiple 1st round picks to draft him. Especially with ATL at 4 trying to trade it.

That’s how our old GM did yes. I can do the same thing and say drafting a top LT gets you Matt Kalil... See it doesn’t really work that way. You can’t say never take a position at a certain round because another staff failed at it...

I agree, but if they think in a year Lance can be the next big thing. We have Darnold for 2 years and if we salvage him can probably either trade him or get a nice comp once Lance is ready. I don’t think you draft an unfinished product at 8 though, but that could be their justification if they do.

I mean the guy we draft at 8 can bust too. It’s always an educated guess/ thinking. I’m not against taking a LT. I am if Fields is there at 8. I’m also very high on Fields and don’t justify Darnold as a reason for passing on him. Before we had Darnold people were fine with taking a QB in 1 and LT in 2. Darnold doesn’t change that in my eyes. He makes us more comfortable sitting at 8 and seeing what happens. Fitts just said drafting a QB is still an option and our staff hasn’t been good at hiding their intentions. Look if/when Fields is gone before 8, I’ll love getting Sewell/Slater and I will be glad we got Darnold.

This draft is suppose to be deep at LT. We also had different people drafting players in the past. Can’t hold Fitts/Rhule accountable for Hurney’s mistakes. Your option is assuming Darnold is a capable starting QB in this league. He might be or he might not be. Darnold is our backup plan in case the draft goes QB crazy which is probably will. It also prevents us from having to compete in a bidding war to move up. Im just saying, only IF our guy falls to 8, we draft him. Let Darnold and him battle it out. Having two talented QBs wouldn’t be a bad thing. Darnold might even start until the rookie is ready. I think Fields is a blue chip QB that would be too good of a prospect to pass on compared to Darnold. Hopefully we will never draft this high again for a while...

I think we can get one in round 2. If Fields is gone (which he probably will be) then I’m all for Sewell, Slater, or Lance (depending on how they view him).

The analysts I’m seeing seem pretty split, with more still high on Donald. He is very much a big question mark, not unlike these draft prospects...

Because they had a proven, HoF, still playing at an elite level QB? Darnold is a project and far from a sure thing, doubling up just increases our chances of having our next franchise QB especially if a talent like Fields falls to us. It’s really not the same thing at all... The Packers were just in the NFC championship game and still have a window to win it all. We are rebuilding so finding a young QB is possibly the most important part of this rebuild.

So says Atlanta. They are trying to increase the value/demand of their pick. If a team trades multiple first round picks for it then so be it. That’s why we locked up our back up plan. That still leaves 3 picks for Lance or Fields (whichever doesn’t go at 4) to fall IF there is even a trade up. We are in a much better position than before. Either one of the guys we like fall to 8 and we draft him and can even let Darnold start until he is ready. If they all are gone by 8, we already have our backup plan and can grab a LT to protect him.

Not yet!

If Fields is there, you taken him immediately. If Lance is there then you have a tough decision to make. If they are both gone Slater or Sewell. Surtain should be worse case scenario...

To me he is our backup plan in case no other QB falls that we like and the capital is too much to go up and get one (thanks Niners). If one falls and we draft them no one will care about our 2nd next year and if they all go above us, we will be happy we traded for Darnold. It really makes sense. It’s like the GM that helped Seattle be a consistent, competitive team knows what he is doing...

Some teams like Slater better so possibly 5 QBs, Pitts, and Slater/Chase/Smith could all go 1-7. I’ll be happy with Slater too.

Yeah and for a player with way more upside/potential starter if the draft doesn’t fall out way (which it very well may not).

We can spread that $18 million over these next two years is what I read. So a 2 year $23ish million dollar deal for a backup/potential starter.

I think Darnold replaces Teddy and is there in case none of the top QBs make it to us, which is a very real possibly. If we really like Fields or Lance and they are sitting there at 8, I could see us taking one. The Chiefs didn’t start Mahomes right away and it worked out great. Especially if it’s Lance as he may need more time to develop/adjust. Just because Darnold WAS a first round pick doesn’t mean we view him as one. We traded next year’s 2 and some late picks, which took us a couple weeks to get that high.

Ah yes the stat that has Fitzmagic rated higher than Tom Brady, Russ Wilson, Drew Brees, and Watson...

At the end we went up on our offer to go ahead and get the deal done, but originally several teams were interested, they just wanted a 1st which wasn’t happening. Also here is Fitts on us possibly still taking a QB... https://www.panthers.com/news/scott-fitterer-adding-sam-darnold-gives-panthers-options?fbclid=IwAR1UQvKczkk26mnZcAMjBO3rtvcXsNj3FlpIyLn1xNoz5BrgMwEej0dLECg

I think so. Then you start Darnold until the rookie is ready.

I think if they waited until after/during the draft it could have turned into a bidding war for him. I’m pretty indifferent/ optimistic about the deal. I like it better than trading multiple 1st rounders for an unknown rookie, better than sticking with Teddy, and better than drafting Mac at 8 (yeah I know he is probably going at 3, but still). Darnold is actually a lot more mobile that I initially thought which is another nice surprise. If we have Fields or possibly Lance available at 8 and we pass because of this deal I will be some what disappointed...