woahfraze

I think Burns already broke out. That being said, very pleased with how the defense is looking going into next year. Still could use additional talent in places, particularly the secondary, but it's clear from the players the staff has brought in that they are prioritizing pass rush, and if it works out, I think they can be a top 15 unit this coming year.

We better not take Walker Little. At least not before the later rounds. Hasn't played football in 2 years and has injury concerns. You can't spend a 2nd on a player with those risks. It'd have to be a late round flyer.

Teven Jenkins. I know his pass pro. isn't quite on the level as his run blocking, but oooeee, he is a road-grading mauler that plays with a mean streak in the run game. I know that might "sound" like a RT and not a LT, but I don't think he's incapable of playing on the left. Also, he's got to be better than who we have currently over there. Obviously it would be nice for the team to give Moton a shot over at LT, where many feel he could also thrive. But I don't think the Moton or the team have interest in screwing up a good thing, and he'll stay over on the right and continue to lock it down. Also, having Jenkins is insurance in case they can't reach an extension agreement with Moton. If Moton leaves and Jenkins is better suited to RT, we can slide him over.

Moreso general (light hearted and not serious in any way) commentary on our sister state to the south. I have no ill-will toward the school or the denizens of the State. Just wanted to point out that I am in no way a SCAR homer.

Jesus, I can't believe people are complaining about the possibility of losing a player to free agency four or five years from now. That's a possibility with any player regardless of position, not just CB. And it's a good problem to have. It means you drafted a good player who produced well for you on a cheap contract for a few years. Sure, you'd love to keep them in free agency if the price is right, but whether or not the stay has no bearing on whether it was a good draft pick.

I'll spot you five better schools for DBs: OSU, FSU, MIami, LSU, and Alabama. You've got 25 more to go....

Yes, but we don't know who will still be available tomorrow. Hence, need to wait until Round 1 is over to truly discuss.

I went to UNC. Eff our inbred cousins to the south. I'm not SCAR fan. Just calling it like I see em. You're the one making the outlandish claim. Burden of proof is on you.

Name them.

Program aside, it's churned out some damn good NFL CBs. Name another school with a better quartet than what he named. There may be a few out there, but not many.

Top 25/First Rounder? Yes. Top 8? No.

Yea, I don't understand the Fields (apparent) fall. I've watched a lot of YouTube breakdowns (Brett Kollman and JT O'Sullivan, in particular), and he looks like the real deal.

I could see Fitterer really wanting Horn. In Seattle, John Schneider and Pete Carroll were big believers in the SPARQ score (Speed, Power, Agility, Reaction, and Quickness), so I wouldn't be surprised if FItterer is too, as someone that was part of that regime. The SPARQ score is a composite that takes into account multiple drill results to try to quantify athletic ability. So a player that had a blazing fast 40 time, but didn't do so well in the 3-cone or shuttle drills wouldn't have as good a SPARQ as a player with above average 40 (but not elite) but great agility drills. I don't know exactly how the single metric is calculated, and it's very possible that different teams weight all the input drills differently. And I don't know what Jaycee Horn scores, but I do know that he would score very, very highly in it. There's a simiilar measure, Relative Athletic Score, and of 1,748 CB prospects since 1987 to have been graded on that based on their pre-draft measurables, Horn ranks first out of all of them with a perfect 10 (according to Brett Kollman). This is to say nothing of what the tape shows or how he interviews in person. But Seattle's MO was to draft big, athletic players and coach them up on technique and the mental aspects of the game. That seems like something Fitterer and Rhule would believe in too.

1) Obvious troll is obvious. 2) The decision to have to pick up the option has to be made a few days after the upcoming draft. Any QB competition that occurs (and unless Darnold is just absolutely terrible in camp there won't be one--the team has clearly moved on from Teddy) will occur well after that decision is made. So even if you were serious (you weren't; see point 1), that isn't even an option.

Ok, I can sort of see this middle ground.

This. Don't commit until he's shown enough on the field (and mind you, they'd be making this decision without much first hand experience of him in person in meeting rooms and OTAs, since voluntary offseason workouts just started last week I believe) to warrant the 5th year cost, which I believe is $18 or $19MM. The only reason I can possibly see them exercising it is if they are worried that if he performs well, he'll want to test the free agency market instead of resigning after this coming year. But if that's his intent, then he'd still test it after his fifth year. So that doesn't really make sense to me either. You're still in the same "still looking for a long term solution at QB" situation, whether it be next year or the year after.

On the roster or not, he's shown nothing that would prevent us from bringing in additional offensive linemen regardless of position.

This is not how the salary cap works. You can't just "eat" a player's salary. This isn't the MLB.

While this is technically true, my general belief is that you can find above average WR play in Rounds 2 and 3 (or later) than you can above average offensive line play. WRs coming out of college these days are simply more prepare to contribute early on in their career than offensive linemen, with the average NFL offense incorporating more and more concepts that originated in the college ranks (e.g. spread field, RPOs, etc). Can you find good linemen later on? Yes. I just think it's less likely. So I would very much prefer to take a stud offensive linemen at 8 and then try to find your 3rd WR (yes, I understand that with Robby Anderson and DJ Moore's contracts being up next year, we may need to view this player as a No. 2--I don't think we'd lose both) than vice versa.

I think expectations need to be tempered. Darnold likely won't match pretty much any of the numbers being tossed around. But that won't mean he isn't the possible solution at QB. It may take a bit of time to fully fix him. As long as he shows marked improvement over the past few years with the Jets--and that's based more on the eye test that what numbers he puts up--then I'll be OK with rolling with him for Year 2 and seeing if that upward trajectory continues. Edit: Marked improvement means he's playing well enough that you think you can win with him. Yes, I understand that a good bit of improvement from him could still mean he's playing pretty darn poorly. If that's the case, then move on and find your franchise QB elsewhere.

Also early for me. . Shouldn't say 1st in there. I would edit, but since you've quoted the post, I can't.

Just because multiple teams have inquired/shown interest in potentially trading for Teddy doesn't mean he's going to garner a 2nd or 3rd round pick. If that's what the Panthers ask for, these teams will hang up the phone having done their due diligence because Teddy isn't worth that much. Yes, teams are QB desperate this offseason, but with his contract, the best we can hope for from Teddy is going to be a mid- to late-1st round pick. If he's moved, I'd guess we can get a 4th or 5th for him at best.

"A" makes a bit of sense. But if he's shown enough after Year 1 that you feel he could be the real deal even if you're not 100% sure, you can resign him. So I don't understand why you wouldn't see what you have in him after this coming year before making that decision. "B" makes no sense. If he flames out, he's not a competent backup. And even if you want to argue that he's serviceable as a backup, $19MM is way too much to be paying a backup QB. His cap hit absolutely would be prohibitive to trade because all of that amount is guaranteed, but that's a moot point. Because if he flames out, no one is trading for him period even if his salary wasn't so high.

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself. For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out? This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in. Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk. Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not? Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it? Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers? That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

I agree with this. Just bite the bullet and move on next offseason. These folks hoping to "recoup" the 2nd from the Darnold trade by moving Teddy are delusional. He doesn't have the same unfulfilled potential of a Darnold or the proven track record of a Stafford. The market may not require us to give up picks to unload his contract, but at most we're getting a late round pick for him. He's more valuable as a backup who knows the system in the event the Darnold trade blows up in our faces.