mrcompletely11

10 minutes ago, strato said:

I am gonna say, it has to be on the concern list.

OTOH it isn’t last year. The two guys flanking the C are going to be a bit more help than the guys we had. I mean, I didn’t know why Zavala was on the team after watching his misadventures last season.  

In his defense he was a rookie that didn't really have training camp becauseofinjury.  Then thrust into starting lineup. He was a road grader in college.  Hopefully he provides depth at guard

3 minutes ago, toldozer said:

Not as insane as trading him for peanuts when the cost was already sunk

and there is that as well

Just now, rayzor said:

i'm becoming less and less worried about their ability to do the job.

like others, i'm just worried about durability,

bingo, I honestly have no clue how frequently centers get cut during TC or what not but we seriously need to be proactive if one becomes available.   I just cannot see a world where corbett stays healthy all season with those knees. 

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

once we drafted JStew I felt we had to let DWill walk

once they paid DWill I thought you had to let JStew walk

but that made you a hater.  In real time, everyone loved those dudes.  They were interreacting with fans and all sorts of stuff.  Can't remember the details but I feel they had a little online fanclub thing  and were sort of early to the online engagement. 

 

 

extending cmac when  we did was equally insane

47 minutes ago, CRA said:

what about the 3rd best C for a RB

Thats a good question.  We have to assume he will not be 100% until later in the year at best and we are not winning anything this season.  So maybe the 2nd best center this season and then simply draft the top rb next year as the roster is getting built out.   All I know is corbett has been hurt 2x now and we are asking him to play a position in the nfl he never has.  And I guess backing him up is another player thats been hurt 2x thats never played the position in the nfl.  I dont know man that seems like a massive red flag on the line for a qb that doesnt like pressure

1 minute ago, jb2288 said:

I don’t know I’m starting to get a suspicion Corbett was never the true plan and it was always BC. If true, we already have 2 centers on the roster and we know BC is an average to above average guard based on his rookie year. Gotta imagine he is better in year 3 even coming off injury and can hope he’s able to make the switch 

if we are relying on a guy who has never played center coming off a season ending injury to be the center then we are not even giving bryce a chance........oh wait we are and its his back up as well

4 minutes ago, falconlynx said:

Looks like we should have made you the GM. You obviously know more than Dan Morgan and everyone who observes practice and talks to the players daily. 

dan morgan like young, didnt want to trade burns, liked dj johnson and pushed for jamie robinson

if people are skeptical its not blindly

1 minute ago, CRA said:

I mean, his O is literally on film from last year.  They stubbornly ran the  ball mediocrely and then had Baker chuck it downfield off that.  

He is more John Fox than Mike Shannahan.  

Frank had no secret offense.  Neither likely does Canales.

I want to believe he is a wonder kid play caller, but godalmighty there are a ton of red flags going against this.   I truly would like to know what we were the only interview he got.  Nobody else thought he was worthy to simply bring in and listen to what he has to say especially since he is a supposed qb and wr whisperer

33 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

While I agree with you to a point, I think the routes were simplified to deal with Bryce's physical limitations. I think we would have seen much more creativity in the offense if we had a big armed QB behind center like Stroud, Richardson, or Levis.

If you take time to watch that video on page 6 of this thread, you'll see that Bryce was terrible on the deep pass last year. 

 

Teams quickly figured out that he wasn't able to throw deep with consistency and not a threat to throw outside the numbers unless it was a short curl or a bubble screen. You really only had to drop 10 yards and take the area between the numbers. Even if we had receivers last season that could get better separation, the opposing team still would have been able to defend our passing plays because it's easy to sit on the routes.

they got to preseason specifically the jets scrimmage and were like "oh fug, oh fug" and it didnt really get any better from there

6 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I agree, but that is the widely held "unspoken rule."  Just to give the matter more perspectives than ours--I see it as an investment for next year--part of the current long term plan.  When negotiating, however, people want it NOW and it has that value now.  But we wanted it for 2025, so it will have second round value to us.  If I were making a trade and the Seahawks offered a second right now and the Rams offered a second the following year, of course--all things equal--the Seahawk offer is the better offer because I can use it immediately. 

It could be that these GMs value now more than next season because their jobs are on the line now--if they do not get results, the second rounder belongs to the next GM--I don't know--but to your point, the player is going to be the same player--the value is not on the talent, it is on the timing of the talent.  Just spitballing.

so is that first from the rams in 24 still devalued? 

1 minute ago, Ornias said:

I see no reason to waste reps on him. 

Just now, Gapanthersfan said:

The first TC practice will show A LOT.

I bet TMJ balls out..........again

16 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

I mean run first and get the ball out in 2.7 seconds...

if 2.7 seconds isnt coach speak then XL is a pick for the next qb

25 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Yeah people are not grasping this. Just because Canales is a younger coach it doesn't mean he's some super creative offensive mind. He wants to basically play Fox/Rivera style football. He alludes to it in pressers all the time. Although running zone instead of power which I'm personally not a fan of

if the game plan is to simply run the ball to make young a game manager then yeah we are truly fuged on so many levels, I gotta think that is all coach speak and he has a modern day nfl offense planned. 

17 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Here is how it breaks down:

Rams trade us pick 52 (380 pts) and pick 152 (29.8--- 30 points rounded, totaling 410 points) for pick 39 (510) points. So basically, the 2024 draft trade was Rams give us 410 points for 510 points--a difference of 100 points.

Panthers give Rams 510 points.

Rams give Panthers 410 points (2nd and 5th) in 2024

• If the Rams win the Super Bowl in 2024, they would still give the Panthers the 64th pick, or 270 points.  Worst case scenario for the Panthers is the get a total of 680 points of value for the 510 points they gave the Rams.  The difference is 170 points. 
• If the Rams finish 2024 like they did 2023, the Panthers will receive 380 points in 2025.  That means the Panthers get about 790 points for 510 points, a difference of 280 points.  
• If the Rams have the worst record in the NFL in 2024, they would give the Panthers 580 more points than the 410 already given--990 total points for a 510 point pick value.  The difference is 440 points. 

But you have to remember, future draft picks have a value of one round less than the current draft year.  It is like an investment of a 2024 third rounder that will mature into a second rounder in a year.  So if you want to see how much we bested the Rams, you have to take that into consideration.  

If you want to do that, then you have to weigh the trade using a current third rounder and not a second rounder. 

• Panthers:  510 points for pick 39
• Rams:  600 points:  380 points for 2024 pick 52 and 30 points for pick 152.  Third round value in 2024:  190 points.

That is the equivalent of having the Rams throw in an additional early fourth round selection on top of the deal.  So it depends on how you look at it--to me, getting the 2025 second rounder was so important, I might have agreed to much less to get it. 

 

this is such a bullshit rationale that is fed from GM's.  A future second is worth exactly a future 2nd for a franchise.  It may not be apples to apples in regards to gm as they may not be choosing.  But there is no negative value assign for trading picks in the future.  It makes no sense to try and devalue.  If so then you would see the adverse affect in play

29 minutes ago, Johnstonny said:

...I mean where is Fitt now.....NOT IN THE NFL!

morgan agreed

35 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I've heard the 26 draft will be the best one yet.  Nico and Arch leading the way!

Spring game aside (where his highlights are pretty nice) Arch hasnt even taken a snap yet

23 minutes ago, travisura said:

If Bryce breaks out and leads us to 7-8 wins then they wouldn't be drafting a QB anyway.

in his 3rd year?

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

Maybe someday. I was never a fan of giving a RB a second contract. 

between stewat, dwill, cmac and sanders (feels like I am missing one) us fans could see in real time slow motion that every one of those deals was a mistake

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

I know. That's why I do not care if he goes. This season he's on his last chance IMO.

This franchise will absolutely never learn about running back contracts.

18 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

One of the dumbest decisions I have ever seen.

No none qb is worth not taking that deal

Just now, Jon Snow said:

I think quite a few mailed it in last year, including the coaches.

100% but miles stunk out of the gate when he did finally play

1 minute ago, CRA said:

again, I care about what type of player you are was you enter the draft.   I mean, that's what you are for the most part.   

QB, RB, WR, TE, OL  I  mean you can find dudes that really only shined one year at different spots for an assortment of different reasons.  In the end, what type player you are you enter the league is all that matters.   Hell, some dudes come into the NFL and have never played the NFL position they are about to play.....

one year of great play is one year of good play.   And that one year of great play is right before coming into the league.  That's the comparable.  Everyone's path is different.  It's not like there isn't a story on Leggette's journey.  Played QB his senior year of HS, COVID, Gamecocks literally went into seasons without a QB pulled staff to play, etc....any by the time they actually got a QB, Leggette blew up.  You just choose to ignore that for Leggette.....but acknowledge why others only had 1 great year. 

Dude on fnz who calls the gamecocks radio went into it hard how in the offseason XL went heavy on nutrition and weight lifting to get to where he is.  Thinks that is a big reason and also he was the only wr and he raved how good rattler was. 

9 minutes ago, UnluckyforSome said:

Denver is a possibility. Tough division, not much on the roster, AFC gauntlet. 

The worst part about it is we could double our wins and still be at or near the top of the draft.

depending on mayo the pats could be pretty bad with brissette starting and maye taking over halfway or so in.  

2 hours ago, CRA said:

I mean, there are tons of recent studies on NFL players and ACLs.  

The average is still about 11 months return to field.  RB, LB, and DL are also statistically are the worst positions to get an ACL injury per studies. 

But yeah, there are always dudes that defy the averages.  But every young guy with an ACL isn't going to be part of bringing the average down.   

I still think it's a red flag.  I think Carolina should be slow and cautious.  Not get caught in a rush of wanting to see talent just because we lack it. 

https://www.thefantasyfootballers.com/analysis/the-impact-of-acl-surgery-on-fantasy-performance-running-backs/

https://www.statcrunch.com/reports/view?reportid=31371&tab=preview

A few examples, not a full list just cherry picks it looks like

all in all it looks like it takes a full 2 years to get everything back