Icege

Thanks @CarolinaLivin! Didn't have as much free time as I wanted to follow the rookie camp at all so this thread has been a godsend.

Damn, that sucks for Derek. I always liked him as a person, especially after he hopped on the Huddle just to be proud of his older brother. Hope his next chapter goes smoothly for him.

Don't forget the young TEs, Coker, Etienne, and Jimmy Horn Jr! I'm amped to see how the team develops over the course of this upcoming season.

I mean... a lot of the information that could've helped set better expectations has always been out there: There was no RB on the team under contract for the 2025 - 2026 season except for Miles Sanders. The team did not have a second round pick going into the 2025 season due to the trade for Young. Chuba's extension did not happen until the beginning of November. Jonathon Brooks was the clear RB1 in the class with a massive gap between RB1 & RB2. Example: Dane Brugler had Brooks as RB1, overall #48; Blake Corum was RB2, #81 overall. The Giants held pick #47 and had just lost Saquon Barkley to the Eagles in free agency. They were going to take Brooks had the Panthers not jumped in front of them. So if we're framing things with that context: Chuba was expected to be RB1 Miles (at the time) was RB2 Brooks was essentially RB3, stashed for rehab in 2024 with a long runway. The original injury occurred Nov 2023 while the re-injury occurred December 2024. That is right in the high-risk window for recurrence, especially in explosive athletes. The fact that it also happened on a non-contact play suggests possible biomechanical issues such as muscle imbalance, rather than a failed surgery (or bad decision-making). NFL teams invest heavily in medically vetting prospects. If there had been a clear red flag in imaging or recovery markers, the team is going to find it. This sucks and the Panthers have sucked, yes, but this wasn't blind optimism or malpractice by the front office. It was a calculated decision based on the roster, draft capital, positional scarcity, etc.

These are the three deep throw attempts that Will Levis made in week 12. His first one is a beauty; Levis and Westbrook-Ikhine gets the safety to bite on a deep dig only to go over the top for the score. His second throw is another beauty: a crosser to Calvin Ridley reminiscent of Bryce to XL (though Ridley has noticeably more separation on his route). His third and final deep shot was an incompletion from his own endzone on 3rd & 14 with pressure coming down on him (to me, this seems like a solid throw). Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-02.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-01.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-01.mp4 Levis took half of the deep shots that Young did. The differences are: Ridley had much better separation than XL, which is why his deep crosser turned into a 63yd play since he was able to scamper for another 15+ after the catch. Westbrook-Ikhine holds on to his TD pass. Bryce had to throw one away to preserve time for a field goal. Bryce had two more throws that were incomplete due to the WR Are we really holding the three WR errors and clock management decision against Bryce in order to say that Will was better throwing deep in week 12? That's not passing the eye test nor is it confirmed by the data.

So you believe that Levis had a better day throwing deep because one of those was a TDs? Asking for clarity on that as it was already clearly demonstrated that Bryce would've had a TD had Moore not dropped it in the back of the end zone. The entire purpose of their metric is to look at the throw and grade that because the QB has complete control over it. That was made abundantly clear from the video provided prior to that. Nobody is trying to manifest him as a top-10 player. He had performances during his return from benching that measured in the top-10 in different metrics. The issue at play is that because those stats support Bryce's progress (and refutes that his ceiling is his floor), that you and other people that don't care for Bryce being the Panthers' QB are going out of your way to either a) ignore factual data, or b) cast uncertainty on the methodology. There's no actual interest in stats and facts like as you mentioned previously. All of the non-PFF info, like passing yards in a single game, is also not entirely reliant on the QB. That's one of the points that Jimmy has hammered home but y'all continue to try and sidestep: that the ability to throw deep relies more on elements like timing rather than physically having a howitzer for an arm. Yes, arm strength does play a role but let's not be coy: the entire narrative that Bryce is not a capable deep ball thrower is 100% rooted in the same reasoning that folks had for thinking he wouldn't survive an NFL hit... bro is too smol. We have plenty of data (AND film) that show this. Whether or not the people that don't want it to be true stop clinging to what they want to believe instead is up to them.

It's been strange watching the NFL try and turn itself into a "luxury experience" The prices to attend a game these days certainly matches that of a luxury experience, at least.

ngl, I like the idea of rookie contracts being guaranteed. It's not like the kids are able to negotiate with anybody else. idk enough about the finances and accounting tricks to give any type of expert opinion, but that's never stopped anyone here before

Good. Let the kid focus on PT and building strength back up. He's got two more years on his deal and RBs have never been more affordable, so there's still time to see whether or not he can stick. My bad. I meant: blaaaaaargh dumb dan dumb rb no leg no draft raaaaaarrrrrgh

Found a playlist and maaaan this is some trashy TV that I can kick up my feet and laugh at.

Damn... wouldn't have minded having Clowney as part of the rotation for the young guys to pick up being a pro from. They must be really excited about Nic and Princely.

You also think that lead paint chips should be called wall candy. So, respectfully, that's not moving the needle here. There needs to be a little more than, "I don't like it" to dismiss the entire methodology.

You're now willfully misrepresenting what is classified as a BTT which has since been cleared up. It is not the oversimplification you are attempting for. I understand I put down a lot of info earlier, but it is more valid than one's own desire to not relent.

So... about that...

I was just wondering about this yesterday because by my count (including unsigned draft picks + UDFAs) we were at 95 players.

re: PFF having Bryce Young as the best deep passer in week 12 Link to original article Excerpt from the article: PFF's passing-by-depth report for week 12 NFL Pro's Film Room Play 1 - Completion to XL running a deep crosser despite multiple penalties by KC on the play Film Room Playlist NFL Pro.mp4 Play 2 - Completion to JT with the pass rush closing in Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-01.mp4 Play 3 - Hits David Moore in the hands while taking a shot from new Panthers' DL Ter'shawn Wharton for what would've been a TD Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-02.mp4 Play 4 - This is the first play that folks could attempt to pin on Bryce if not for one detail... this was 3rd & 10 with 9sec left in Q2 (as seen in the screenshot showing the list of plays). Bryce had to air mail it out of the back of the end zone so that there was still time to attempt a field goal before halftime. Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-03.mp4 Play 5 - Bryce places this ball where only David Moore can get it (spoiler: Moore does not get it). I've included the other angle as I was confident that some would try to hyperfocus on this play as why PFF was wrong in their evaluation. It's worth noting though that this wasn't a drop Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-04.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-05.mp4 Play 6 - Sideline shot to XL but he drops it. Again, both angles included to avoid bad faith misrepresentation. Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-06.mp4 Film Room Playlist NFL Pro-07.mp4

If progress is being acknowledged then there must be data that supports said progress. However, when those stats are cited, they're dismissed as "cherry picked" or "too subjective." That contradiction is doing a loooot of heavy lifting. Nobody is claiming that Bryce is a top-five QB in the NFL. The argument is that post-benching, he showed real growth and some of that performance was in the top-10 range of various measures. Instead of engaging with that nuance, there's shifting of the goalposts and selective skepticism. The tape is being rejected. The stats are being rejected. Even when the methodology is explained, it's still rejected unless it paints BY9 in a negative light. Nobody seemed bothered by the Turnover-Worthy Play % stat, yet Big-Time Throw % is sending folks into a spiral. Funny how the only "arbitrary" stat under fire is the one suggesting Bryce might actually be improving.

It is shocking to me how folks can't find a simple definition but think that they can define what is acceptable:

If there's a list of what is considered acceptable data, I would love to see it... because right now it feels like the only stats that are being called "cherry picked" are the ones that support Bryce's progress. If the tape isn't acceptable and the stats aren't acceptable (unless they denigrate BY9, of course), can somebody let us know what is acceptable aside from the performative cynicism being offered?

Great watch, thanks for the link. I've got their Baker vid queued up next. Odd that folks seemed to have an issue with understanding BTT% but not TWP%... almost like the issue isn't so much the data but what it does to their narrative

I love what they've done to start the first two offseasons... One more like this (and results on the field to match) and ooh wee mayne

Makes me wonder if her expertise in human trafficking is what landed her a position wi-... you know what, I'll be good.

I guess DK was just so that they could get rid of Pickens then... Wild.

Super excited for him getting another shot, especially while dealing with such a tough condition as UC. Good friends of our's went to HS with and have nothing but good things to say about him. Plus, he went to Clemson so that's another feather in the cap.

Please clarify if you're trying to have a good faith conversation and I’m happy to respond to your questions — though they have already been answered by others.