MHS831

KC too

I think the top 4 are a lock to go in the first round, and any combination of the bottom four names could go. Is there a WR on that list that you would NOT take at #33? I think the odds are strong that one WR will fall to #33, if not 2.

What a piece of fluff. Duh. You keep your best players--drafted or not. Why is this a "pat yourself on the back" moment? All teams do this.

T'Vondre Sweat (DT): I absolute love the thought of him in the middle with Brown and Robinson right beside him. Shy Tuttle while good as a rotational piece isn't the space eater that Sweat is. The thought of having him on the line is super exciting. I like him, but he looked sloppy at the SR Bowl to me. He would definitely let the DEs and LBs eat. Our needs for the early second round may make picking him a luxury and not a priority. Edgerrin Cooper (LB): I know the board loves Payton but I like this guy even more and comes without the injury concerns. He can blitz and is extremely fast. He also is good in coverage. Payton processes much quicker than Edge, but is more injury prone. The way I look at it: Injuries may or may not happen, but processing will happen on every play. Luke was the best at it, and this guy is nearly as quick. Khyree Jackson or Cam Hart (CB): I just want one of those big body CBs that can be taken in the mid rounds. There are several mid round CBs who are going to be solid depth players. I am still not satisfied that our starting CBs are good enough--i just don't see that much of a dropoff between the second./third round CBs and the fourth/fifth rounders. Ja'Lynn Polk (WR): I really like this WR. He seems to be a great WR to take over for Thielen when he moves on. Love his hands and is a bit shifty. Doesn't have breakaway speed but really like the potential with him in the slot. I do like other WRs better but don't see too much written about him. For the slot I Like Corley, Ladd McConkey and Ricky Pearsall. the second two can play outside if needed, but I think both project better as a slot than Polk--but I am often wrong. Polk played in a very high octane offense with a good OL--but he is not that fast and he is not that quick in and out of breaks. Good size for the spot and he goes after the ball aggressively, but the DBs in the NFL will minimize his advantages and exploit his weaknesses more than, in my opinion, other types.

My take on Luvu was that he was a bit slow to read (2 gap) and liked to shoot a gap. Not a bad player, but he was a bit overrated by Panther fans because he flew in under the radar. However, I would have kept him, but tough choices had to be made. to me, not re-signing him tells me that we are going after a LB in the draft--Even if we signed jewell.

Is this after the new contract details are out?

The Man of the Year nomination was surprising to me, probably because he is so quiet about his business. But character matters.

I feel much better paying Brown than Burns I hope that comment makes his Spidey senses tingle. "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to not get hurt... "

The Carolina Panthers and defensive tackle Derrick Brown have agreed to a four-year contract extension, the team announced Friday, with a source telling ESPN's Adam Schefter that the $96 million deal includes $63.165 million guaranteed. The $24 million per year average on Brown's extension is the fourth highest in the NFL for a defensive tackle. It trails only the Chiefs' Chris Jones, Raiders' Christian Wilkins and Ravens' Justin Madubuike, who all signed new contracts as free agents during the offseason.

Of course, it is early, but I agree with you. And I, unlike some of the Huddlers whose prom pictures were with their right hands with a wrist corsage, admit when I was wrong. I hated the Morgan hire. Changed my mind, of course.

I was hoping the timing of this extension might be for that reason. Makes sense.

Good point. But if he wasn't, who were they referring to? Chinn? YGM? Corral? CMC? We basically have kept Moton, Shaq Thompson, and Brown---but Ickey, Horn, Chubba, BC, Tremble, Marshall, Mingo--and none of them have come up for a second contract yet.

Not even close....Yep.

Just let Burns walk. Too soon?

I recall some teams taking 2 QBs in the draft (not sure about consecutive years) and it turned out. Aikman and took Steve Walsh (going from memory, so correct any mistakes) that same year in the supplemental draft. Of course, perhaps the richest QB ever was selected in the fourth round behind RGIII. I think Brock Purdy and his success in SF after playing a lot of ball in college has opened some eyes. If you are the Panthers, you draft a QB in round 2 to develop to be a backup and compete. I do not get why anyone should think that competition for the starting QB is a bad thing. Iron sharpens Iron. My perspective, however, is that we have Dalton for this season, but who are we getting next year, if we need to develop a Young replacement? In other words, if you think Bryce sucks and you think we should not waste a pick on a QB this season, then my question would be, "Then you are good with keeping Bryce for 2 seasons?" Next year, Dalton is gone and we have a bust QB in year 3--if Canales fails to bring him along. We are not in a great situation, and the blame goes to the dotards that are no longer here and Tepper, the lone supreme dotard. Having said that, it is my view that Bryce would be better off with a seasoned veteran in his ear than a developing rookie, so I say that going "all in" on Bryce may be the way to go--not the ideal way...

Denver is rumored to want him, but they pick around #12. Without a second round selection, I would not be surprised to see them over-draft him. If they do not, however, we could probably get a future first rounder and their third rounder this year for him. Just spit balling--have not heard that.

3 weeks til we go on the clock. As you all know, during these days of speculation and roster analysis, I tend to throw stuff out there--the things you don't talk about at parties, but you need me on that wall. Where was I?....Oh, someone said something that I think could warrant discussion, especially amongst all you Bryce haters. Point: Canales said he was going to build an offense to play to Young's strengths. He is true to his word--did it before.' Point: The Panthers interviewed/met with Bo Nix at the Combine. Point: Canales never said there would be no "Plan B," and he never said that they were "all in" on Bryce. Point: The Broncos are interested. Point: The QB crop does not look great for 2025. NFL Network Description of Nix (6'2", 215): Rare five-year starting quarterback whose play has matured in front of our eyes. Nix displays the accuracy, arm talent and athleticism consistent with today’s brand of pro quarterback. He can be punctual in getting the ball out at the top of his drop or he can work through progressions and beat defenses with second-reaction plays. He throws with good velocity and puts the ball on the money when throwing on the move. Nix has shown great improvement with his pocket poise. He’s capable of moving the sticks as a scrambler or as part of the running game. Some of his gaudy production has been driven by the Oregon offense’s design, but his talent clearly stands out. I’ve harbored bias from watching the overwhelmed version of Nix during his Auburn days, but as the saying goes, “tape don’t lie.” Nix appears more than ready to attack the league with an NFL-caliber skill set. Point: The NFL Network claims that Nix has the skills to be a "plus starter" in this league. Point: There are successful QBs who have benefited from lots of starting experience in college. One played in Super Bowl. Point: The NFL Network site compared Nix to Tony Romo. https://www.nfl.com/prospects/bo-nix/32004e49-5811-8212-6abe-fc1a8b4f4942 QUESTION: Would you pull the trigger at 33 and take a WR at 39? I need the truth. We will call drafting Nix a "code red." Would you order the code red?

It is an acronym and very difficult to pronounce. *Just kidding. I hated to put it because I only watch ESPN when the NFL Network is not interesting--and I have some strong reservations about the NFL Network. Still, they do have so called "experts" and this is based on what they were saying, but not the essence of the point.

The end to my post: " (Hypothetically speaking here--could be less, and probably will be). " So I agree--it never works out like that, which is why I was very clear to state the source of my lists and provide this disclaimer. I would state, however, that a team with WR as the #1 need will likely grab a WR if a solid WR is available. If a lesser need is a better value, you have to weigh the overall impact. I think I make it clear that the list was based on teams that have WR listed at their #1 need and provide the site, then mention the number of teams that have WR listed as the #2 need. We have 2 LBs who are going to be 30 (Shaq and Jewell). We have a GM who gets the importance of an ILB--based on the information you provide, LB could be as big a need as C, WR, and CB-- I am not sold that they spent $160m on Guards and will go into the season with Corbett and Mays at C. I am like you--I take a C if one is there. Long term, great pick. Short term? Maybe a great immediate pick. To your bigger point: I agree--BPA. We have so many needs.

I am going out on a limb here....First round teams that are likely to select a WR: Arizona Baltimore Buffalo Cleveland Kansas City LA Chargers N Y Giants WR is believed to be their #1 need. WR is also the Panthers' #1 Need--so if we take a WR at #33, it is possible that we are spending our first and most valuable draft pick on the ninth best WR. Yikes. That means WR is the #1 need for 8 teams, according to Mock Draft Database. Another 9 teams have WR listed as their second need, so if we don't take the ninth best WR (hypothetically) at 33 or 36, we could be taking the 18th best WR at pick #65. That means that during the first 64 picks, 17 Wide Receivers will be chosen or considered carefully. (Hypothetically speaking here--could be less, and probably will be).

That is something I did not know--and I can say that the Panthers are targeting Peyton Wilson with confidence---He processes the plays more quickly. If Bo Nix drops to 39, do you take him? It would screw us up on paper, but not having all eggs in one basket at QB might be smarter than having depth at CB or LB. Screw hurting anyone's feelings--he would be a good value and give you a backup (on way or another). He is about 18 months older than Bryce, fwiw. I see Denver making a play for Nix, but maybe moving up in round 2--but they do not have a second rounder, so it could get interesting. I figured Penix (with his injury history) would fall as well, and I think the Raiders are going to go after him.

In my view, there are not many ILBs in this draft. We know that we need an impact player at WR---after that, I am not sure what our biggest need is--TE? C? LB? CB? After adding 3 Edge players in free agency, I do not see us adding another. Not really sure about DL. Does the new kickoff rule impact anything? This is very difficult

I am with you on this. If we trade back to about 45-50, sounds more appealing, of course, but I think Morgan is salivating over this guy--just a hunch (Maybe I am getting Luke and Dan confused, but either way...)

I hear ya, but injury history has to factor into the "best player" equation. In other words, if he and Edge Cooper (Tex AM) were equal in every way, I would go with Edge--he would be the "best" player. I can say that after Wilson, the quality of play drops off quite a bit--if all players are healthy. I think we'd take Edge and Colson from Michigan if we had too--Gray (UNC) is more of a WLB--and he is probably on the table too.