MHS831

I am too. You have to consider how a player would make others around him better. A S, for example, could make the back 4-5 secondary players better. An Inside LB makes the front 7 better. A WR would make Bryce and TMac better. (I like Caden Curry too, as well as Crownover) I have mocked your first two picks more than once. I like OTs converted to C like Parker from Duke because they could play OT in a pinch. However, the C wealth in this draft is sick.

I am aware. We are 1 injury away from Kenny Pickett too--does that mean we should draft Simpson? So you are saying that the Panthers should draft an OT and that is the only course of action a responsible GM would take? You are not wrong, CSX, but to me, timing, other needs, the Ickey situation, etc. make it more complicated than you are making it.

You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1. I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter. So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate. QBs are a great example. Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith. Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there? Wharton (280lbs)? So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover? A deep free safety? A quality center? A playmaking TE? A DT to replace Robinson? A wide receiver to balance the secondary? Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right. Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.

Nuff said.

I think, based on what I guess GMs are thinking, that he is LT #2. He sure takes a steep drop vs. speed rushers--that bothers me, but hey, you get it back in other ways. I would be happy if that is what they think we need to do. To me, it would me that they are not expecting Ickey to return to form OR Moton's knee is worse than we hoped. (reading tea leaves).

I definitely understand the "draft a T" move--it is just not what I would do right now in this situation. thanks

This is a good thread--I definitely see both sides--just explaining how I feel on April 3...Nice to have civil discourse.

I worry about the OT situation, but I do not expect to see them invest a first rounder after signing a starter until they get information about Ickey. I see drafting Moton's depth, but not if you reach in round 1 to do it. WR? I am not happy with them either--the best WR in the draft was the second best WR on his team and the second best was a slot. Edge? Deep in this draft. Want to build your future? Take advantage of the deep talent pool at edge. LB? I love the expected day 2 collection. C? The draft is deep and round 3 and after is when to shop. Yes, we need a tackle and when we know more, we can be more strategic. IMO

It is simple if you focus only on OT. But there is the cap, talent levels that differ from year to year, and team needs that fluctuate, as you know. While I would be happy with an OT and understand it, I am not sold on OT as the answer. I agree that the game is won or lost in the trenches, but I do not think over-drafting with the first round pick is the only way of addressing it--especially if it may be a year before you know what you have or reap the rewards. We both agree that you have to stay ahead of it. Just because you take a T in round 1 does not mean that you have met the need. Teams need qbs too, but drafting them too early in round one is usually disastrous A few weeks ago, I was high on Freeling. I still am (cautiously), but there are reasons to approach some of these tackles with a "Buyer Beware" approach. Again, I am not against drafting an OT in round 1, but not if that OT has a late first or second-round grade. That is not good value. On top of that, put him in the garage for a year? Take Freeling, for example. Some project him to Cleveland at 6. Really? He is a fringe first rounder, IMO. IF you want to give away draft capital to get a non-starter, that is how GMs get fired. First, we can address Freeling’s seemingly massive improvement in pass protection. He did earn an outstanding 86.1 PFF pass-blocking grade in 2025, which ranked seventh among qualified FBS tackles. That was an improvement over his 65.3 mark in 2024. Georgia’s passing game was heavily built on play action and screens, which allowed Freeling to partake in just 95 true pass sets all season. That ranked just barely among the top 200 tackles in the country. Freeling earned a solid 75.4 PFF pass-blocking grade on those true pass set reps, but that pales in comparison to top tackles in the class, such as Francis Mauigoa and Spencer Fano. Mauigoa earned his 85.8 true PFF pass-blocking grade, second best in the nation, across 212 such reps, more than twice as many as Freeling. What about Freeling's run blocking? 61.3--which is slightly above all tackles in the country. So if you draft Freeling in round 1, you are getting a guy whose numbers were padded by play action and screens--but in pure passing sets and in run blocking, he was average when compared to every tackle in the country. Elite? Buyer beware. Lomu? Athletic, Can struggle in the run game and against power rushers. Late first rounder-early second, imo. Arms less than 34", which could scare some teams. Proctor? Can play high and the weight could be a problem he fights. Personally, I see him as the best option for an immediate starter but his ceiling is lower. I realize all players have areas of concern, but I think you will see some of these OTs drop on draft day, with good reason. Fano? 32 inch arms may kick him inside to G. You will respond that all OTs have question marks, and they do--but not researching the situation is not the answer. Freeling is a stud athlete, and despite the stats, I like him, but not as depth at 19. Proctor? I get it if you needed your starter now, and speed rushers give him fits. To adjust, his angle to block a 9 tech is nearly 90 degrees when it needs to be closer to 45 degrees. That decreases the pocket, and a short QB can't have that.

They had the abbreviated airport name on the chest--ATL Which I translated to mean "Another terrible Loss" -- I suggested that they put "28-3" on their sleeves to commemorate their last Super Bowl appearance, but they rejected my proposal.

I definitely see your point, but the issue to me is this: Do we have the immediate urgency right now to draft a T in round 1 when there are other positions that could use starters from the draft? Secondly, I find this draft to be weak this year, with about 14 players with first round grades (arguably). I do not think the OTs in this draft are average, but there are more of them considered to be first round candidates based on the weakness of this draft. Since we have 2 proven starters, maybe we should draft a project later and if we have the need next year, draft the OT then? Your facts are indisputable, but we have to take our situation and the availability of talent at OT in 2026. This is a very debatable topic--so I definitely see your view.

It kinda looks like a generic Cardinals uniform to me. I guess the news is they are ditching the black jerseys. And I think this will be their alternative helmet:

Let's say we have a LT for 2026, because we do. After that, let's say Ickey could be back and we would have the option of extending Walker. That too is truth. Don't get me wrong--I LOVE drafting OL, but drafting a first-round OT now is either wasting the money we just paid for a free agent OR it is like paying top dollar for a new car and keeping it in your garage for a season. A first rounder should give us 4-5 years of cap relief by playing from day 1. I shall elaborate here: Teams obviously get desperate for OTs and if they enter the draft without 2 solid tackles, they are almost obligated to reach for a first round OT. This year, I see 1 OT who is probably worth first-round consideration, and I am not putting him in the top 10 players in the draft. Lomu, Freeling, Miller, and Proctor, for example, probably and arguably have second-round value. So why would you reach for an OT in round 1 when you already have starters at both T positions but you have other needs? We do need depth, however, and I think there is decent OT depth that needs development on day 3. They are no slouches, by the way. Drew Shelton (could drop to round 4): Surrendered 1 sack as Penn State's LT in 2025. 33 3/8" arms. Pass pro improved every year (4 years--experienced). "For a team running a zone-heavy scheme that values lateral movement and reach-blocking ability over phone-booth mauling, Shelton has real appeal. He is not a plug-and-play starter, but the athletic tools and the clear year-over-year improvement suggest a player who can develop into a capable starter if a coaching staff invests in his strength base and cleans up his technique. The ceiling depends entirely on how much stronger he can get and whether his feet can stay alive after initial contact." Austin Barber (could drop to round 4): I see him as a RT at best and a probable kick inside to Guard where his strengths would switch from secondary to primary tools. Considering Lewis and Hunt may be gone in a year or two, this would give the Panthers a chance to work him at RT and then move him inside if he is not effective, and there is confidence that G may be his best position. Jude Bowery (4th round projection) was LT on a Boston College OL that was effective in the run game. Bowery is one of the most athletic OTs in the draft. His arms are not ideal but not too short (33.75") to play LT. He surrendered 2 sacks. He is raw, and needs some technical refinement with his hands. I think he has the best upside and value for this offense. Dametrious Crownover TexAM (5th round projection; 35 3/8" arms) is one of the more fascinating developmental tackles in this class because the physical tools are legitimately rare. A strong run blocker who should be better in pass protection with his tools. "You do not find many 6-7, 336-pound men with that foot speed and who have the athletic background of a converted tight end. When everything clicks, he looks like a starting right tackle in a gap-heavy run scheme, smothering defenders at the point of attack and using his length to erase speed off the edge. The 2024 tape, when he anchored one of the best rushing attacks in the SEC, is the version of Crownover that gets offensive line coaches excited." THIS is the kind of player our coaches could develop until Moton is done. Isaiah World (Oregon, injured ACL in playoffs, 5th round projection--could slide to 6th). World will not play much if at all in 2026, which is why he might fall. For the Panthers' purposes, however, this would give the OL coaches time to work with him. "What made World intriguing coming out of Eugene was the untapped ceiling, a fifth-year transfer who arrived as the top-ranked offensive tackle in the portal and looked the part for stretches. The improvement he showed against Big Ten competition in his one Oregon season was real, and the physical foundation, length, athleticism, and improving technique in pass protection, is still there. The ACL tear suffered in the College Football Playoff semifinal against Indiana doesn't erase that, but it changes the conversation significantly." "That said, the investment argument isn't crazy for the right organization. This is still a tackle with first-round portal grades and the kind of athletic profile that doesn't just disappear. A team with patience and a strong offensive line room can afford to stash World on the roster, let him develop his lower-body power and pad-level consistency during the recovery process, and potentially unlock a starting-caliber right tackle somewhere in his second or third season. The path is longer now, but the destination hasn't changed for a scout willing to bet on the physical tools." You get the idea. If we do not need the OT immediately, draft one later and develop him as depth and for next season. Most college players drafted in round 1 were not first rounders if they had entered the draft the year before, so why not grab a player with upside?

Personally, I don't think so. Here is why: Blocking--our T situation could need help. A 245 lb back can help. If we keep a RB in to block and release, we are able to release a TE without chipping the speed rusher more. It sure seems as if we are going to address a pass-catching TE. Short yardage.

yep, and how many combinations of the OL did we have last year? Our free agents are decent, but they could digress in this offense.