Sgt Schultz

1 hour ago, Jon Snow said:

I tend to take Jimmy Buffets approach and say it's 5 o'clock somewhere. 

Well, I wasn't going to say it, but my drink to this was my second.  But that takes some of the celebratory spirit out of it.

As does the fact that I will drink to almost anything.

It's almost 5:00 here, and I'll drink to this news.

3 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

What if they select neither? The meltdown would be catastrophic. 

That thought has entered my mind.  Then I remember neither Hurney nor The Process is involved in this decision, and my mind is put at ease.

Slightly in the Stroud camp, myself, but what the Texans do after we pick means nothing to me.  If anything, the Texans passing on which of these two we do not draft has a better chance of being an indicator that they will be wildly successful in the NFL.  Trying to get any great insight on the meaning of life based on what the Houston Texans do seems roughly the same as deciding what to do with one's money by listening to my ex-wife. 

Any debate over whether we made the right or wrong pick may be decided by the results on the field.  I say may be because both Stroud and Young could be crazy good......or both wash out in a couple of years.  I think the former has a better chance than the latter, but you never know.  We may look back in a few years and say we couldn't lose with this pick.....or couldn't win.

49 minutes ago, Wundrbread33 said:

I do see people setting themselves up for major disappointment, and arguing in such a way that they will have to choose between holding onto their beliefs, or supporting the QB we actually draft. 
 

It’s fine favoring a prospect, but both these guys are talented players, and both are a chance at fixing QB. 

Exactly.  I've said I favor Stroud, mostly because I am concerned about Young's general physical stature taking NFL-level beatings over the course of a season.  Now granted, I am a little biased because of the way our OL's have allowed our QBs to be beaten in the past (and I hope that is past tense....finally).

But, I see 19:2 and 21:2 TDs to Ints in that stat line and it makes me smile.  It tells me that neither QB was exactly doing stupid things when they were under pressure.

16 minutes ago, Luciu5 said:

I feel like most people in this thread have no idea what this test is. Especially the guy who said he took it online lmao. It's proprietary and as far as I know, nothing else out there like it. From their website:

Athletes perform a 30-45-minute evaluation on a specialized laptop computer that measures how they process and make split-second decisions in their sport.

I don't think anyone is taking this test on some random website online.

Next up.....a bunch of us took the test at the bar last night, during happy hour.

Everybody is looking for some way to predict whether a QB (or any position) will work out if they are drafted.

The problem I see, just from what I have read, is the proponents say the S2 correctly identified several prospects as hits and they were.

Who else did it identify as hits that were not?  Who did it not identify as a hit that were?

Numbers can be dangerous things.  I'm not saying the S2 is NOT a good identifier, I just can't conclude that based on identifying 5 or 6 guys that turned out great without knowing the false alarms or misses.

17 hours ago, Jmac said:

The Panthers don't give a shat what sports writers have to say. They have to write something for the next seventeen or so days before the draft to earn a living.

I'm sure the team knows exactly all they need to know about player X by now. They certainly don't give a rats ass what other teams may do sitting at #1... unless they plan to trade down (which I doubt),

 

Well, then the Panthers and I have something in common. 

1 hour ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

lol

The back n forth with these Stroud/Young threads are hilarious.

 

Im expecting a Young thread any moment now...

Probably right after Juan posts another thread, this time with Matt Rhule or Moe Howard giving their insight on who we will draft. 

Moe will have either Young or Stroud, while Rhule will say his inside sources tell him it is Max Duggan.

Put a moratorium on Juan starting threads for 60 days prior to the start of the draft.

1 hour ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

Can we just make one thread for the latest hot take reporter post? 

That should be titled "Latest BS, Speculation, and Conjecture" 

There are two separate issues at play that should help most of our defense.  Some will benefit from the switch to a 3-4, and I would perhaps put Burns at the top of that, but as the discussion has pointed out, there are several candidates.

Then there is a coaching staff who will hopefully assess the talent's strengths and weaknesses and put them in the best position to succeed whether it is a 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, 7-0.

Honestly, I could care less about the 3-4 switch.  The second change has me a lot more pumped up.

1 hour ago, kungfoodude said:

I think either guy is acceptable to me personally. I favor Young because I think he might be the best at processing information that we have seen in a while coming out of college.

I am not going to get mega butthurt if we draft Stroud. He is a very good prospect in his own right.

Of course that is a minority opinion since this place has largely devolved into two cages of warring Young and Stroud monkeys, screeching and flinging poo at each other in every thread.

I'm in agreement with this, except my preference is Stroud over Young.

The problem is that I read both Stroud and Young will be gone by the time we select at #1.

What we have here, like what we have at the heart of most of these threads, is a writer doing this:

44 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Of course it does

It doesn't matter that the league decided to go with Nike over Reebok, once that change happened, the team should have forced Nike/NFL to make sure they can produce our proper team colors.

It's absurd to think that we just have to settle with what they had, this is the freaking NFL, there are 32 teams, don't make a deal with a uniform supplier if they can't deliver proper colors for those 32 teams.

Don't think for a second this has nothing to do with the team, if they wanted to, this would have been done for year 1, not that hard to force them to make our uniforms in the correct color scheme.

One would think that the capability to produce the proper colors for the 32 teams would have been part of the contract with Nike.  It's not like those colors were not known when the bids for the contract were being requested.  If Nike could not do that with the material they were proposing to use, then bid another material that can.  If they can't or do not want to do that, then thank you very much, better luck next time, next in line please.

It's a specification.....they can either produce something that meets it or they can't. 

12 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Is the situation better now, though?

I know some would say it's always been this way, it's just open now. Maybe that's true, but is it a good thing?

(granted, the Livvy Dunne thing kind of has its own questions)

Whether it is good or not is subjective, and is almost irrelevant because of the perspective that needs to be added "according to whom?"

In general, I agree with the statement that sunlight is the best disinfectant.  Whether people see that as good or not is up to them. 

I also don't think what we are seeing right now is what will be happening in 10 years.

1 minute ago, run-run-pass-punt said:

I have no sympathy for the NCAA either, or any of the other endless forms of greed and corruption out there. But things aren't going to change in a meaningful big-picture way. One corrupt entity will always be replaced by another, or the strong (haves) will exploit the weak (have-nots) in a new way. It's just the nature and prevalence of greed in the world that where we live.

There is always a transition period between a corrupt organization and its replacement (or leadership turnover), where the new organization/leadership is both idealistic and aware that all eyes are on them after the stench of what got driven out.  So, there would be a few years where the replacement organization would be focused on its mission rather than its own feeding and expansion.

Then the destructive cycle starts all over again, usually with hiring management consultants.

It exists in organizations not profit driven, too.  I've worked in and around a government agency for nearly 34 years, and they constantly drift away from their mission into "more glamorous" things (usually in the name of power and "the integrity" of the organization).  It's not like they do that in addition to the mission, it is at the expense of the mission.  Then something bad happens, the leadership is purged, they refocus on the mission, and about 5-7 years later start to drift off into Never Never Land again.

7 minutes ago, run-run-pass-punt said:

Yes, I understand, but you can't retroactively right every wrong. The litigation would have no end...oh wait.

And they might be able to snap that line tightly to the NIL changes had they signed a consent decree and avoided the litigation, but they didn't.

This is what class action lawsuits were made of.  Otherwise, the NCAA may wind up in endless litigation and could well wind up bankrupt.  Honestly, I don't feel sorry for them one bit.  They milked the "preserving the integrity of amateur athletics" angle for years, decades really.

The NCAA gets what it gets at this point, and they have spent a long time setting themselves up for that fall.  Some governing body is needed, but they proved they aren't it.

1 hour ago, Matthias said:

Somebody asked if Stroud and Young were the same size, would it be any question who was the number one pick.  For me, I would still go with Stroud because I favor his style of play.  That's not to say Young is a scrambler or anything like that, but he is more big play ball.  I like the guy who is more methodical.  A 10 yard pass here, a slant there.  Just someone who gets under the opposing defense's skin.  Above all else, as I said of Stroud before, throwing is effortless for him.  There is nothing like a skill that is second nature, and Stroud's skill is throwing.


So can I live with it as a Panther's fan if we don't pick him and Young struggles.  It would be like for me, the same feeling I had when Tom Brady threw those three miracle bombs to Mike Evans to end our run for the playoffs.  I was asking myself what in the living heck are we doing out there?  How can we let this happen?  All you had to do was put a safety over the top, and it wasn't like Mike Evans was the fastest guy in the world. (I still want to dump CJ Henderson and Keith Taylor from this team for their transgressions LOL!)  If we pick Young and he bombs, I'm going to be thinking 'What are we doing'?

I wouldn't feel this way if Stroud wasn't available by the way.  If Stroud stayed in college for instance, and the top QBs available were Young/Richardson/Levis, I would be 1000% okay with picking Young and letting the consequences be what they would be.  I just feel like Stroud is about as a sure lock for greatness as there can be outside of a Peyton Manning, John Elway, or once in a generation type.  My feeling is Stroud's floor is a longer version of Andrew Luck's career.

And let's face it, they are not the same size.  I got the point of the question, but that is essentially asking if we remove the biggest concern/liability on one prospect, which one is better?  If you are comparing two houses, and you like one a lot and love the other but have real concerns about whether it is too small, you can't base the decision on which one you would pick if they were the same size.  They aren't.

50 minutes ago, Soul Rebel said:

Don't want.....

• Gradiant uniform colors (see: Falcons, Atlanta)
• Two-tone helmets (see: Jaguars, Jacksonville)
• Alarm clock digits/numbers: (see: Buccaneers, Tampa Bay)
• Numbers on the top of the shoulders (see: Panthers, Carolina)

I pretty much agree, with an qualifier on the shoulder numbers.  Almost every team has them, but if they have to be wedged in to fit, leave them out.  I don't think the Bengals have them, so they are not required by the league.

35 minutes ago, rayzor said:

i'm anxious to see what they look like and i thnk it's probably going to happen, but i don't have any clue whatsoever what they should look like.

i do know that the ideas that have been thrown around in this thread have me less than enthused lol. 

There are some rather frightening uniform concepts out on these interwebz for every team.  It is a form of pollution, really.  I guess the good news is that the trend for teams has been to go to a more classic look, with the exception of the Falcons.  I'm not sure what the Falcons were trying to do.

When you see people with some great new idea for the Packers, Steelers, Bears, Raiders, Colts, or Niners, you know they have too much time on their hands.  I think you could add the current rendition of the Chargers, Browns, and Bills to that list, as well, since they all reverted back to their classic uniforms. 

I'm hoping that whatever we do, we don't try to outNike anybody.

2 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

I think he's the least talked about #1 qb of all time, pre and post draft. 

He may be. 

In fairness, he was drafted by an organization that may get less attention by the talking heads than any other in the NFL, including us.  If that was not bad enough, then he got drafted by that organization when they had a head coach that made The Process' look like Bill Parcells at the NFL level.

Despite all that, his team got to the playoffs in his second year and led them to a huge second half comeback after stinking the place up in the opening half.  Doesn't sound like lack of commitment or focus to me.

3 hours ago, CPcavedweller said:

I also remember Darnold getting crushed a few times waiting so long...can't wait to see Young get bear hugged by a 6'5 340 lb dude.

That's my concern.  Banking on a young QB that is 5' 10-1/2 and probably legitimately 195 is a big gamble. 

I know, the NFL protects QBs but that is about like finding out the local police department  closes 97% of homocide cases.  Great, and it probably cuts down on murder, but it doesn't mean much for those attending the funeral, nor fans seeing the penalty flag next to the guy stretched out on the field.

Young is going to get hit, and his general build raises concerns about his ability to withstand it.

I won't be upset if they draft him, but I will hold my breath every time he gets wallopped, penalty flag or no.

5 hours ago, CPcavedweller said:

3.02 seconds in the NFL is an eternity to hold on to the ball. Add in his lack of arm strength and you're shrinking the field vertically and horizontally depending on the hash as well.

If I remember right, the league average is around 2.75 seconds.  Darnold's time to throw last year was north of 3 seconds, so our line was providing that time.  But, if opposing defenses conclude that the QB NEEDS that time to function, they are going to dial up the pressure.

As far as our rather impressive protection (time to throw) number, that was probably a function of not only our OL, but our tendency to be a run-first offense.  That semi-constant run threat gives pass rushers an initial pause which can be the difference between 2.75 seconds and 3 or better.