Jon Snow

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

The media's early guess is that the Panthers go after Ramsey. 

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Agreed.

Also don't put him behind Pat Elflein on the depth chart

Eflein should not be on the depth chart at all.

3 hours ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

Maybe, maybe not. 

They are not.

The Panthers are not drafting AR.  

Seriously doubt they would trade him to us even we were interested.  Which I hope we are not. 

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Probably something our resident draftniks will want to take note of too when looking at potential draftees.

If a guy comes off as not necessarily being the sharpest knife in the drawer, that's probably gonna take him down a few spots.

Athleticism only gets you so far.

I'm liking the staff more and more with every interview.  The future looks bright fellow Panthers fans. 

24 minutes ago, electro's horse said:

god damn those starters jackets

I owned one of those.  I think I ended up taking it to goodwill a couple of decades ago. 

I'm going to say if the Panthers make this trade its for CJ. 

37 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

For the first time maybe in franchise history starting OT is actually clearly NOT a need. I'd be shocked if we took an OT.

I suppose my shock level would depend on what they do in free agency.  Yes I too would be surprised that in that scenario they would go oline over dline.  I guess he is the best olinemen in the class so there's that. Other than that I see no scenario where they would draft the guy.

18 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Damn Capers mop looks crazy

Someone should tell him they come in age appropriate colors. 

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm trying to think of an example that suits this statement

It occurs to me that Jacob Eason could be decently suited to the practice squad role you describe. Likewise, Jacoby Brissett has been rightly mentioned as someone who knows Reich's offense and could fill the veteran role (cheaply).

Even though Brissett may know the offense he will not be any help in games under center.  He's bad, really bad, PJ Walker bad. 

10 minutes ago, Bear Hands said:

Totally.  I see McKee and Hooker being viewed more favorably internally for teams than the draftnick's think. Doesn't place them solidly in the 1st but who knows.  

There's a perceived cliff around their tier because of all the guys who didn't declare: Jayden Daniels, Penix, McCall, Ward, Nix.  So, you've got less than favorable R1 trade up candidates (a la Lamar) that people who want BPA at 9 can promote.   It's just McKee and Hooker, then there's a pretty substantial drop off to Haener, Duggan, Hall, then a lot of nothing.  

But overall, as a prospect class, compared to this time last year, the only guy that truly fell off the radar was Tyler Van Dyke.  The rest all held the hype.    

Stroud, Richardson, Levis, Young were all getting buttered up as 1st rounders even during the 21 season, and many were excited about them headed into this past year.  Not to mention, many had been high on Haener here and there, although the reality is he's Day 2 at best (just too twig-like but he's still a fave of mine)  

Compared to the last decade, this is honestly a lot more promising than others.  I'd say it's better than last year, 2019, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, & 2013.  People are getting lost in the Maye/Caleb fever dream and losing context.    

4 1st rounders, 2 potential late 1st/2nds.  And then 2-3 solid mid rounders. 

 

I've seen both Hooker and McKee ranked higher that AR. I've seen Hooker ranked higher than Levis. This class is viewed differently than the media mouth breathers are predicting them to fall. I just cannot put any stock into who's going where this early. The underwear Olympics will have mock draft nuts throwing sh!t out there to get clicks. But until FA is over teams draft boards will not be set.

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

Cool.  You don't have an example 

Cool. Neither do you.

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Do you have an example of a team trying to develop 2 qbs at the same time?

Do you have an example of a team only developing only one qb on their roster? Why would any team have more than one qb on the roster if the do not intend to develop them to be able to run the offense in the future or in case of emergency? You are not suggesting the they have only one qb on the roster that can run the offense? 

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

It has nothing to do with rhule.  Other teams dont do this.  Why not?  Because its not feasible.  There are limits on practice time etc.  Why in the hell would you split those when your job is on the line? 

 

Do you have an example of a team trying to develop 2 qbs at the same time?

Did you actually read what I posted? Did I say anything about splitting reps? You seem to think that they have to get the bulk of the reps in camp to be considered developing.  That's not the only thing that is involved with developing a qb. The practice reps are to build chemistry with the rest of the offense if and when they have proved they've mastered everything about the offense. 

1 minute ago, mrcompletely11 said:

How?  Reps are a premium and it has nothing to do with Rhule.  Do you have an example of another team developing 2 guys simultaneously?  If teams could do it they would except the resources and time are extremely limited.  Why would a team rob peter to pay paul in regards to valuable preseason/practice/game time reps?  It doesnt make sense.  Thats why people were pissed last august when rhule was splitting premium first team reps.  It doesnt work.  Name the starter, name the back up and practice accordingly.

You keep going back to Rhule. They will not just spend every class hour and practice only teaching one qb.  That is developing them. The practice time with the ones will be determined by which one has the playbook down better and can run the offense with the one's.  That person will get the bulk of the practices with the ones until they show that they are not going to cut it or someone else challenges them for the starting roll. They will not just stop developing the rest of the other qb's just because one eventually starts. This is not amateur hour like before. 

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

The practice time, reps and game experience makes this hard.......and risky.  Just go all in on one guy if you are trying to develop someone.

 

I cant think of a time when a team actually developed 2 guys.  Washington and cousins may count but that was due to injury.  Jimmy G and New England is probably a good example.   Outside of the starter getting injured I just dont see that as a viable path.  Devote 100% of your resources in making your top 10 pick a franchise guy

This is not Rhules staff you're dealing with here. They will absolutely develop all of these young guys. Developing doesn't just involve taking up practice reps with the ones. 

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Reich said in his presser yesterday that the TE coach would be named in 24-48 hours, so maybe some news on that front today.  This needs to happen, because he also said the entire staff is assembling this week to assess the roster.  The TE coach will be getting a bit of a late start.

Not really. We only have one TE to assess in Tremble.  The rest are not worth even considering. 

5 hours ago, CPF4LIFE said:

And where exactly did you get this information? Bryce and Stroud could start tomorrow specifically and Levis is already like 25 so im pretty sure nobody is planning on sitting him,  if so... it would be brief. Richardson is the main one that has received a lot of talk of sitting so all this not ready to start talk for the QBs is new to me.

How are these guys ready to start today? Did they magically absorb every playbook in the nfl just by thinking about it? Did they magically build chemistry with every wr in the league before they are even drafted?  Are they going to do that in just one trying camp? The answer to all of the above is no. This isn't fantasy man. If you are going to proclaim something at least make it realistic. 

42 minutes ago, MechaZain said:

I don't think it changes much either way. He's a longshot and will have to show out in camp for a role regardless. 

Don't let the last staff fool you, more than one QB can be developed at a time.

And they will develop more than one. They are not going to bet everything on just one guy. 

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I remember thinking that seemed awfully high for a lineman.

Had Atlanta taking the same lineman a couple of weeks ago.  These mocks are only for fantasy football nerds because they are NEVER accurate.  I really cannot understand why anyone would take them seriously. 

8 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I want Lamar.

 

You want Carr.

 

Poll all NFL GM's and I guarantee you all them would take Lamar over Carr.

 

Jokes on you.

Add the cost in there and ask them the same question.  Jokes on you. 

3 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

What vet QB? I want to win a Super Bowl not just go to the playoffs and until we get a franchise QB we are going no where. 
Playoffs maybe good enough for some people but not me. 
I am getting very impatient. 

You are in for a very disappointing season if you are expecting that this upcoming season.  Even Cam Newton could not do that his first season.  Ironically a practice squad/nfl Europe qb we signed did. But I digress. My point being we will not start a rookie before he's ready and there is not one in the draft ready to anyway. So a vet it is for the time being.  You might as well accept it.

Well this thread has gone off the rails.