BrianS

Let me get this straight. You're saying that a QB with a 20 - 2 record, 67 TD's against 9 INT's, with a 70% completion rate . . . underperformed? What more could he possibly have done?!?!?! Did he have bad games? Sure, he did. Please, find me a QB who hasn't had some bad games. I'll wait. I'd sure love to get us an underperforming QB like that here in Carolina.

This is what people are failing to understand. The fact that we traded for Darnold should be irrelevant to building a successful franchise. If there is a QB who our staff believe is a franchise guy sitting there when we are on the clock, TAKE THE PLAYER. It shouldn't even be a discussion. Darnold could fail (some would argue he has). The guy we draft could fail. Nothing else is relevant until you have that guy, so if the cost of getting that guy is a 1st, 2nd, 4th and 6th, FINE. People are going through two, three and four 1st round picks to get a QB already. This is peanuts.

I completely agree. This was always my concern for Cam, which unfortunately came to fruition. It's no different for Darnold, Fields or Lance. To me, the most important part of being a QB in the NFL is being able to throw the ball effectively from the pocket. Everything else is icing. My point above was that if your differentiating factor is athleticism, and you're talking about a Darnold / Lance comparison . . . Darnold doesn't win. Lance is a better athlete. Is Lance a better QB? I dunno. I'm not his biggest fan, but I haven't seen anything from Darnold either. What I can say is that given comparable arm talent, Lance has managed to take care of the ball better at his level. Does that translate to the NFL? Man, if I knew the answer to that I'd be making a LOT of money as a player personnel guy.

Exactly. If our staff think there is a bona fide NFL franchise QB on the board when our pick comes up, you TAKE THE PLAYER. If we end up with two of them on our roster, FINE, we'll figure it out. Let's say we draft Fields. I don't think he starts week one, I think Darnold does. I think both play extensively in the preseaon. It also means we are UNLIKELY to pick up the $18 million option on Darnold, meaning he's now in a career year with every motivation to play OUT OF HIS MIND. Now, suppose Darnold lights it up. Great. We've got our franchise QB and the cost was a first and a second. THAT'S ACCEPTABLE for a franchise QB. We've also got this guy on our bench who might ALSO turn out great, or at the very least he's a backup better than Teddy / PJ / Beard Guy. WE WON. Suppose Darnold is mediocre. He's probably a better backup than anything we have. Toward the end of the season Fields comes in and we find out what we've got with him. Regardless of what Fields does, we've identified a solid backup in Darnold and we are rolling the dice on a top 10 prospect. ACCEPTABLE AGAIN. Suppose Darnold is terrible. Fine. Fields comes in earlier and we really get to see what we've got there. Darnold is probably still a low end backup, and we could keep him around as such on a low contract. We've rolled the dice on a top 10 QB prospect. ACCEPTABLE OUTCOME. There is now way drafting a QB at 8, assuming our staff believe in him, can go wrong. I shouldn't say it that way. Of course it can go wrong, the guy can fail. But from the perspective of the franchise, you have to take those sorts of risks and they are just a coin flip. There is no version of an NFL roster with too many good QB's on it. There just isn't. If you end up with more than one franchise guy, you keep the one you like best and get your draft capital back by trading the other one. I don't see any other way to look at it.

The only way we should trade back is for multiple first round picks. Honestly, I don't really like the idea of trading back at all. At pick eight, there are going to be multiple nailed on starters at positions of need sitting there. You don't trade that away for anything less than a kings ransom.

Interesting that Daryl Williams (now with Carolina North) had a nearly identical grade to Moton last year. Despite the grade, I still believe we need a LT and some competition on the interior. Playoff teams really need to top 10 line play.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! I'm not a big Lance fan, but come on. Trey Lance is a much better athlete than Sam Darnold. You can argue a lot of things in Darnold's favor . . . NFL experience, age . . . huh. That's not really a lot of things. Honestly, let's say Lance is there at eight. You've already got Darnold for a second and some change. Assuming your staff believe in him, you draft Lance. Your overall investment at QB is a first and a second. If you get a franchise guy out of that investment, you're STILL ahead of the curve statistically.

While I do agree with the analysis of Cam, I also think that it's important that Ron take some heat for that. If we had brought in an actual QB coach & OC, perhaps someone would have taught Cam how to play a different way. Honestly, I believe he was capable. 2018 was already too late physically, but he appeared to really turn a corner that season mentally. Perhaps if he had turned that corner in 2014 instead we might be talking about a completely different narrative. It's water under the bridge, but I believe Rivera deserves a fair helping of responsibility for that.

You can win a SB without Julio Jones. It's pretty hard to win one without a high quality OT. See Mahomes, Patrick. Newton, Cameron.

We already have plenty of money set aside for Moton since we tagged him. Doing a long term deal will likely yield cap relief this season.

I think that's what they want to do. Move some money forward into this year if they can get Teddy off the books.

EXACTLY!

For $60 million, I'll be more than happy to teach anyone anything about my job and let them take over ASAP so I can (*&$ing retire.

You choose whichever of Lance / Fields your coaches and scouts feel best about. It really isn't hard.

In the red zone I'd rather have an OLine that can actually push a defense back. It feels like it's been forever since we could take a first and goal and just run it in.

If you're using running ability to separate QB's you're doing it wrong. There are five other guys on offense who should be running with the ball before you get to a QB. Yes, a QB who can break contain is nice, but I'd rather have a guy who makes the right read and puts the ball in the hands of a DJ Moore / Robby Anderson / CMC. In the case of Lance vs Fields, if we're really down to a slight difference in running ability, give me the guy who did against better competition.

While I agree that wins are the stat that matters, some general tendencies of top tier QB's are: 65% completion rate 2:1 TD to INT 2 TD / game 8+ IAY/PA None of those stats are definitive, but they can be indicative.

Did he seriously accuse us of having an offensive line? I mean . . . I guess if you exclude LT from your offensive line we might have made it up to "average" last year. Who needs a LT anyway.

Oh, like this guy? (I couldn't help myself)

There's a deep, secret part of me that hopes this is exactly what happens so that we can try to draft a QB next year. I'm not proud of it.

You can't pay two franchise tackles, it just doesn't work that way. If, as it seems, our intent is to pay Moton then we can't bring in a veteran franchise level bookend. We need to find that guy in the draft. Preferably in the first round, so you get five years to wind down Moton's contract before you pay new guy.

If something strange happens in the draft and one of the top four is still available, you take the QB. If the draft falls as most expect it to, then you BPA. We have so many needs that no matter who he is, the BPA will help us get better.

To be fair, you need to separate Rhule as a front office influencer / participant and Rhule as a coach. As a coach, I doubt ANYONE could have predicted the level of competence and fight our team showed last year. We were not an embarrassment. We were not an easy out (for the majority of games). As a coach, for a first year in the NFL, with an unproven staff and NO offseason, Rhule showed a lot of promise. Now, as a front office participant, I do agree. We've been very hit and miss during the Rhule era. Robby was great. Teddy, not so much. Rasul Douglas, pretty good. Tahir Whitehead, ugh. Etc. The problem is that QB is the most important position on the field. If you get it wrong, you screw your entire franchise. When you get it GROSSLY wrong, you can fix it with a high draft pick. When you get it MOSTLY wrong, ore PARTLY wrong, it's even worse because you don't have a pick high enough to fix it with.

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.

No. Nothing like that. Brees was considered a good QB in San Diego. He took an injury to his throwing shoulder and was given VERY low chances of ever coming back. San Diego *also* had a known, valuable commodity in Phillip Rivers sitting on their bench. This situation is nothing like.