Mike2.0

7 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Go back and read about the way he left and was fired. There was a lot of disgruntled folks. The only reason they tolerated him was he won. The minute they struggled he was gone.  If he was so great why haven't folks been trying to get him and why did the Vikings interview him last year and not hire him. Again your logic is simplistic and somewhat uninformed. 

In regard to the Vikings, they decide to go with the latest offensive guru from the Sean McVay tree. Some teams love to go for young offensively minded head coaches now rather retreads or defensive side of the ball coaches. Plus there’s probably a very good chance Harbaugh wanted more control than they were willing to give, whereas a first time head coach would not. 

I suspect teams have shied away from him due to the cost and the likelihood he’d want significant control in the front office. Also, as you rightly say, his tenure in San Francisco didn’t end well. So perhaps teams have been hesitant to bring him back to the NFL. Whatever the reason, if he returns it will certainly be interesting to see how it plays out.

This team does have a lot going for it to tempt a coach like Harbaugh. There’s talent on both sides of the ball and our GM has done a good job. The missing piece is at quarterback and Harbaugh would get his pick of who to go for, be it a veteran or someone from the draft. Another plus is our division and it being open for the taking.

It will be interesting to see if he bites and makes an NFL return, but it does make me wonder whether this could be a similar situation to what the Raiders went through. Their interim head coach got them playing well and loved him by all accounts, even made the playoffs. A lot of times that would have sealed that coach the job, instead they went for the flashy hire and it’s back fired. Could the same happen here after the players have come together under Wilks?

The main difference is Harbaugh has had head coaching success whereas McDaniels had none, but still, it does make me wonder what the best option for next season is.

9 hours ago, Day1PanthersFan said:

Cam Newton 4000 passing yds, 21 Tds 17ints, 84.5 passer rating, and I am not including his rushing stats,Rookie Of The Year 

We new Cam was special his first game , and he just got better 

Still amazes me that he never topped 4,000 pass yards again in his career. Came close a few times but never truly developed into a prolific passer. Had he developed that trait I think he would have still been our quarterback or at least won a Super Bowl with us.

In recent drafts we’ve seen people pick apart Josh Allen (example, he’ll never have the accuracy to be a top NFL QB) and Justin Herbert (example, he’s not a leader or the system he played in won’t translate). There are other quarterbacks we’ve seen picked apart and ultimately proved people wrong. So while Levis wouldn’t necessarily be my preference, I wouldn’t discount him because he does have a lot of talent and upside. 

I found the following stats quite interesting. The raiders defense has typically ranked at the bottom end of the league. The best defense he played with was the 20th ranked unit of 16 and 17. A lot of better quarterbacks would struggle to overcome such an inconsistent and sometimes ineffective unit.

2022: 27th, 2021: 26th, 2020: 30th, 2019: 24th, 2018: 32nd, 2017: 20th, 2016: 20th, 2015: 22nd, 2014: 32nd

By no means am I saying we should go for Carr, but if he’s placed on a team with a better defense and decent supporting cast and coaching staff, then there’s no reason why he couldn’t be a good quarterback for a team. As let’s face it, the Raiders have been dysfunctional at times over Carr’s time and that’s surely not helped. 

1 hour ago, raleigh-panther said:

The issue is Josh Daniels 

the guy is a franchise killer as a HC

Agreed, no real success without Brady and Bill by his side. 

Question… if we want to make Wilks our next head coach and remove the interim tag, would we need to interview anyone else? 

Granted it was an article ranking the current vacancies on BleacherReport, but it said we need to interview two minority coaches for the position before we promote Wilks. Is that true?

I could understand it if we had a white interim coach, but in our case we would be promoting a minority coach. Either way it would be a token interview, something Brian Flores and among others have been complaining about in the past year.

1 hour ago, Basbear said:

London 

It’s possible, but is it realistic that a roster of players and coaches would want to be located in London full time?How are the league going to deal with the travel? They can’t give a London based team an advantage by grouping games to minimise travel otherwise the league would need to do the same for other teams in the league to minimise high air miles. There’s plenty of other questions that come along with a London based team. At least Toronto and Mexico City are easier to travel. 

There is demand in Europe, but is there enough to warrant a team full time? I’m not sure. If there was, surely the Jaguars would have relocated by now considering their owners own Fulham FC in London? 

The question is, how many legitimate alternative locations are there for Tepper to relocate the team to if he doesn’t get what he wants?

LA was the big one, that’s gone. Then there was Vegas, that’s gone. Those leverage points have gone and I don’t see other cities and markets having the same sway. 

I suppose St Louis, San Diego, and Oakland could all clamour for another opportunity, but frankly I don’t see them offering up big money to tempt a team. They all lost their teams for a reason. 

There’s candidates like Portland, San Antonio, and Salt Lake City that come up from time to time. But again, are they going to put up big money? I’m not convinced there’s the appetite for it.

Dallas’ mayor has been talking about a second team in Dallas, but I doubt Jerry Jones lets that happen. Same goes for somewhere like Chicago adding a second team, I can’t see the Bears letting it happen.

Only other option would be to look internationally like Toronto or Mexico City. Will they have the appetite to offer public money? I’m not sure. 

Personally I think the public money side of things needs to dry up. Teams should fund their stadiums privately with help from the league, not the taxpayer.

5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

FYI: Here's the full Albert Breer quote that Bleacher Report was citing.

So yeah, pure speculation.

It makes sense to keep our options open. If we are starting our rookie then having Foles as his backup could a good option. If we are sitting our rookie to coach him up, then a short term option like Garoppolo might be on the cards. 

1 hour ago, Jackie Lee said:

I think in that scenario we could leave McAdoo at OC and let Wilks be the motivational speaker HC if that's the goal. 

Wilks stepping in as the interim for Rhule makes sense from the perspective that it keeps our coordinators in place focusing on their side of the ball, then leaving the rest up to Wilks. 

The only thing that makes me hesitant on Wilks taking over is the level of trust placed in McAdoo on the quarterback front. If the GM has deferred to him, then does it make McAdoo our next coach in waiting if Rhule is shown the door? Or is that irrelevant and our GM simply values McAdoo’s ability to evaluate QBs?

5 hours ago, MadHatter said:

With 2 of the 3 top tackles still on the board, I think there was little chance we would trade down.  I think taking a QB or trading back was only an option if Neal and Ekowonu were both off the board.

I’d tend to agree because we have a huge hole at LT. However, trades were flying in on draft night. So if Thibodeaux was available at #6 and a team offered us a boatload of picks to select him, then I could understand why we did it in order to stockpile draft picks to rebuild this team. 

On 5/1/2022 at 6:49 AM, 45catfan said:

What doesn't make sense is the Giants had their pick of ANY, repeat A-N-Y of the big 3 OTs.  We had no interest in a defensive player at #6.  So they could have easily taken the tackle of their choice at #5 and came back at #7 and still got Thibadeaux.  That's the very reason why EVERYONE was shocked that Ickey fell to us.

What if they drafted a tackle and some team that wanted Thibodeaux offered us a deal to move up ahead of the Giants?

At that point they lose out on Thibodeaux because someone has traded up above them. Not worth the risk when there are three legitimate top five pick tackles available. Might as well guarantee Thibodeaux and pick one of the tackles left.

Besides, they got the tackle that makes the most sense for them. Neal has experience at right tackle and they can pair him with their existing left tackle. Ekwonu and Cross mostly played left tackle, with Ekwonu playing some left guard. 

11 hours ago, Centerfield said:

Darnold? .. nah

A third round rookie QB from a feeble QB class? .. definitely nah

Baker Mayfield? Jimmy G? .. nah

You're really fooling yourself if you think the answer is anyone but Cam

bUt hE bEnChED CaM fOr SaM

Yes, because defensive lines were teeing off on our QB's - put Sam out for that, not Cam - and losing was ideal anyway, which Darnold gave you the best chance to lose ..

So don't give me the RhUlE hAtEs CaM narrative because he kept Cam from getting killed further behind trash protection in garbage time of the season games

Sign Cam to a team friendly deal, then let him, Darnold, Corral, and whoever else fight it out to start. Let the best man win. That said, I wouldn’t expect much from Cam. As a passer he’s looked finished these past two seasons with the Patriots and us. 

I wouldn’t count out Corral. The class has talent, it’s just not generational talent. Maybe one or more of this class can emerge as a legitimate starting quarterback and prove the doubters wrong. Alternatively, maybe this class lives alongside the EJ Manuel and Geno Smith class. Either way, we won’t know until they’ve been given a chance.

Matt Corral is a decent prospect with upside. Ok, he’s not seen as a generational passer, but there’s talent there to work with. Maybe he can be our Dak Prescott?

It would be nice to think we get a legitimate starting QB on a third round pay scale.

Hopefully there is an open competition this off season and Corral can beat out Darnold for the starting job, or he can light a fire under Darnold’s backside to make him play better.

It really depends on who they take. For example, if Thibodeaux or Walker are available at six, then I could understand us drafting one of them to pair with Burns. I could even understand if we decide to select Gardner or Stingley to upgrade our secondary. They are all value picks sixth overall. Ok, there are potential franchise left tackles that could be on the board then, but there are also pro ball caliber talents from other positions too. 

The only time I’d be annoyed is if they reach for someone or trade up for a quarterback in this year’s class. But even then, I could understand their desire to get their guy, even though I wouldn’t necessarily be happy or agree with giving up assets for them.

5 hours ago, Zod said:

Said Rhule is building a foundation that he knew would take five years. Then he said heck, maybe 6 years.

 

I feel sick. 

Does Rhule legitimately have his support for five years or has he been given the dreaded vote of confidence? 

There have been many times across sports when owners / decision makers have backed their coach / manager, only for them to fire them a week later or in the off season. 

Now maybe Rhule does have his unwavering support through this rebuild. If that’s the case we’ve got our version of Gus Bradley with the Jaguars.

11 hours ago, Varking said:

 

Jobs are on the line and it’s a quarterback driven game. Until you have that quarterback you aren’t going anywhere. We don’t have that quarterback. So I’m not surprised to hear that we are considering a quarterback at six even though the value isn’t there. 

6 hours ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

JIMMY GAROPPOLOQB, SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

ESPN's David Newton writes that the Jimmy Garoppolo "never has been high on the team radar because he's not considered much of an upgrade from [Sam] Darnold."

Well, that's certainly a take. Garoppolo and Baker Mayfield are the two main veteran options connected to Carolina, and the Panthers absolutely have the cap space to make it happen. But they have neither the draft resources (no second or third this year) nor, apparently, the inclination to believe in either of those quarterbacks. This will be the main quarterback drama for draft weekend assuming nothing unexpected pops up. 

Garoppolo and Mayfield are both better quarterbacks than Darnold based on how they’ve performed in the league so far in their careers.

The only way you could possibly argue they are virtually the same, or that Darnold can do as much as them (if not more), is if Darnold is given the same caliber of supporting cast and coaching. At that point, maybe he could utilise the potential that saw him drafted third overall by the Jets, but based off his decision making that would be a big maybe. 

As for us not going after Garoppolo or Mayfield, I can understand that because we don’t feel they are the caliber of quarterback to elevate us simply by walking into the building. For example, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning etc, can take a team to the next level simply by being there. So it kinda makes sense for us to be looking for better if we have aspirations to compete for the play offs and championships. It also makes sense for us to acquire a cost effective option on the rookie pay scale rather than pay excessive amounts to quarterbacks we feel are average. 

2 hours ago, 45catfan said:

Lol, how?  I know Urban Myer is available, but come on...  It really can't get worse than Rhule.  He's the floor, it can only go up for this franchise once he's gone.

We’ve gone 5-11 and 5-12, we could always win less games… 

The Browns are a perfect example of ineptitude and the next guy up not doing better. They replaced Crennel with Mangini, Mangini with Shurmur, Shurmur with Chudzinski, then Pettine with Jackson.

What about the Buccaneers? Four failed attempts to replace Gruden, then they hit on Arians and luckily Brady came to town. 

Maybe Rhule is the floor and we won’t get worse, but I wouldn’t bet against it if we make another poor hire influenced by the owner.

Personally I’m not convinced by this year’s draft class, and I’m unsure if trading for Jimmy G/Mayfield is the answer. I am not against either of these scenarios, but I feel we are better off waiting for next year’s class if we are going to draft someone or trading for a legitimate difference maker. 

For me, I’d look having a QB competition between Darnold, Cam, and whoever else. Let the best man win the job.  

Offer an incentivised deal. Let him compete with Darnold and whoever else we have in the quarterback room, then start whoever earns it in preseason. If we aren’t drafting a rookie to start, or trading for a QB to start, then we might as well have a QB competition with the best options we can muster. 

5 hours ago, 45catfan said:

The very reason I DON'T want a competitive season this year...Darnold AND Rhule will hopefully be gone in 2023.  I could deal with free Sunday's this fall knowing the following year Panthers football will be worth watching again. 

Depends on who we hire. Our owner and front office thought Rhule was a good idea. I’ll be honest. I’m not convinced I have a great deal of faith in them making a better decision second time round. We could get someone equally inept or worse! 

13 hours ago, joemac said:

No….did you miss the whole “if he puts up 4000 yards and 30 TDs” part? And the answer is hell yes. What more do you want out of a QB than that? 

It depends on if that production translates to wins or whether it’s garbage time. For example, Blake Bortles threw for nearly 4,500 yards and 35 TDS, but they only won five games and most of his production came in garbage time. 

The main thing we need is a quarterback that can lead us to a winning record. Some QBs that achieve that are more prolific than others. It would be nice to have a Pat Mahomes, but if it’s more 4k and 20 TDs so be it.

I’d rather have Baker Mayfield than Sam Darnold or Cam Newton, but I’d honestly prefer for us to look elsewhere for our next starting quarterback. I guess at this point beggars can’t be choosers since our options aren’t great.