LinvilleGorge

I think there's a decent chance that next year's draft is a two QB draft though in terms of slam dunk 1st round QBs.

Yep. I HOPE Darnold is the answer, but I THINK it's highly doubtful that he will be.

1st round bust reclamation projects have a much lower hit rate.

This. I think he was basically the best bad option available and the move was made to prevent the necessity of possibly having to make a desperation move. We'll never get a real answer on this, but I am curious if the move was made with the assumption that Fields wouldn't be there at #8. I honestly hope we simply preferred Darnold, right or wrong. I wouldn't want that level of trade at the QB position to impact our draft board.

I think we'll look quite a bit different on both sides of the ball in terms of play calling even if the overall schemes haven't necessarily changed. Missing CMC last year and having a QB obsessed with throwing three yard checkdowns had to have had a significant impact on Brady's play calling. Same with Snow on D. Reading up on him, what we saw from him last year as a play caller wasn't his preferred style of playing. We just didn't have the talent at DB for him to attack in the way he prefers.

I think so. If he doesn't start off well, that ain't good. His best chance at success is catching the league off guard due to no film on him in our system with our weapons. What we put on tape last year won't necessarily be all that relevant either with adding CMC back into the mix and having a QB with the ability to go downfield. So, if it's ugly early... UH OH. Honestly, I think he'll start out looking pretty good. The rubber will meet the road 4-5 games in once opposing teams have a decent amount of relevant film to study up on.

Remember when Gettleman was convinced that Byron Bell could play LT because he was left handed? We were all like

This. Darnold will have to make a big leap to get to average. I'm just hoping for boom or bust. Be the guy or be the guy who gets us the guy. No half stepping. I don't think Tepper will let them go dumpster diving again next season if Darnold flops.

They may not think the concept of a "franchise QB" is necessary. I would disagree, but maybe they think they're gonna throw it back old school and win with a great roster and a mediocre QB. I don't see it happening, but we'll see.

Market value is market value. It's whatever the market will bear. The Niners offered a lot more. I'm over Fields. I'm not over dumpster diving for QBs.

Our value on Stafford showed we weren't willing to go anywhere near actual market value. I'm not sure that at all indicates they value the position like many other teams. For all we know, Watson couldn't been a man crush of Tepper's and the football guys may not have been willing to come anywhere near paying the price.

They may think they don't need a legit franchise QB. They're certainly acting like it. I would strongly disagree. Anytime anyone disagrees with any move we make, they're implying they know better than the team.

Yeah, I do. Time will tell whether it's founded or not.

If your stance is that they know more than us so why bother discussing it, then what is the point of this place?

There's no shortage of terrible NFL coaches and front office people. This is a discussion board. We discuss things football related. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. These "they know better than you" posts are useless.

It's amazing how many posts you've made without actually saying anything.

Nah, I wanted Fields but I'm over it. He very well could bust. The reality is that there's only one position that you have to have an elite player at to compete year in and year out P.S. I mean, he pretty much did. There's a reason why his OC has never sniffed another OC gig and no WR he ever played with sans Smitty was ever heard from again, not to mention the same can be said for OTs.

My concern is that this crew doesn't really comprehend how hard franchise QBs are to come by. Rhule is an NFL newbie and Fitterer is jaded by lucking into Russell Wilson in the 3rd because he's 5'11" and until recent years being a sub-6' QB made you undraftable in the 1st. P.S. the same was said about Cal QBs prior to Rodgers too and him being a Cal QB probably had a lot to do with his draft day slide.

You're not even good at trolling.

Yeah, that's what makes you a troll. Zero desire to add anything to a conversation, just say something inflammatory no matter how irrelevant. It's your entire shtick.

At least you picked an appropriate screen name.

No, you clearly don't. He was an elite prospect but he wasn't perfect and the criticisms came from pundits who weren't Panthers fans before the Panthers drafted him. Or... you're just trolling. Since that's pretty much all you do, that's probably the most likely answer.

I was glad to get Smith and Taylor. They really stood out during the Senior Bowl week.

You must not remember that draft class. There was a lot of criticism about Luke basically just piling up stats by making tackles downfield because the BC defense was terrible and jumping on the pile to get credit for assisted tackles. There were quite a few people who thought his stats were inflated and he wasn't as good as the stat sheet implied. They were wrong, but the criticisms weren't completely unfounded at the time.

The list of draft prospects with some negatives: Everyone. There's no such thing as a perfect prospect or player.