MHS831

When Rhule is talking about a QB between now and April 30--I would probably not read too much into it. I doubt he'd be promoting the QB he was planning to draft.

I thought he meant finding 4 OL--going to re-read.

We would, and It is hardly absurd to think 4 QBs could go before us if you consider the fact that there are so many teams in need of a QB and those that do not might trade back. Jacksonville--Lawrence Jets--Wilson is a reasonable projection, or a trade for a team who wants Wilson. Are they serious about staying with Darnold for another season? If so, they could stay put and take Sewell. Dolphins--I think they stay with Tua, but they will be approached by teams for a trade, so someone at #3 will take a QB or Sewell if the Jets don't. However, Tua is LEFT HANDED, so is the LT that valuable if the stay with Tua? They will probably trade the pick--to a team looking for Sewell or a QB. Falcons--I am not 100% sold on the Falcons taking a QB here--about 60% sure they will. What rookie is going to be better than Ryan, and why waste a #4 overall to sit behind Ryan for a year or two? You build the defense in Atlanta, and I see a top CB or pass rusher here. Do they pass on Fields here? I think cooler, smarter heads will prevail and they will build the defense and OL before bringing in a rookie QB. Ryan has an expensive contract to break--so they need to think it through. A new QB is likely to bust without a D and OL and the WR issues they might face. So they will assume #4 is a rare opportunity to take the QB of the future. I think Fields is the pick, but do not be surprised if they do not. Bengals--Another team that could trade back if Sewell is gone. Eagles--a Wild Card. Are the committed to building around Wentz? New coach--like Jets, Falcons, etc. I think they are committed to Wentz / Hurts and will draft differently--they will get offers for a trade. Detroit--I think the Lions want a #1 for Stafford so they can move up with the Jets or Dolphins to draft a QB. So, it is not unreasonable to see a scenario like this: 1. Jax Lawrence 2. Lions (trade with Jets) Wilson 3. Dolphins Sewell OT 4. Falcons Fields 5. Bengals Chase WR 6. Eagles Smith WR 7. Jets Lance QB So it is not absurd--even if you only involve the teams picking in the top 7. The top 4 QBs will draw interest from about 15 NFL teams that need a QB. Although historically 4 QBs have not gone nearly that high, I would not call it absurd. I think we should sit tight and take the BPA.

According to a report this morning, the Lions want a first rounder. I think we should give them a second rounder this season and the 2022 first rounder. That is the equivalent of two second rounders in trade value. The Lions already have #7, so they have the position to get their QB in this draft. Then we should trade this year's #8 back for a 2021 second rounder for a 2022 first rounder. If you average all picks and take the mean, that gives the Panthers 840 points of value for 1400 points--a good deal for a team moving up, so they could get more, depending on the team. So we end up with Stafford, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6. (If the comp info is correct). We get back the #1 in 2022. Yes, we are building for the future, but who said you could not start that process with a 33-year old QB on a 4-year deal? That gives the Panthers 3 seasons or so to find the next QB. We could make trades for future draft picks (let's say in 2023) and build the collateral we need to move up for a young QB. Let him sit behind Stafford for a year or two, and transition into the starting role. I know this may sound caustic, critical, or cruel, but it is not: We brought in Cam when we were rubuilding, and it took Cam 4-5 years to get us to the Super Bowl. During that time, he took a beating, and instead of basking in the long term success of having an elite, long-term QB right now, we did not have the pieces built around him--he held the ball because WRs were big and slow and not open, he ran the ball more than he should have and he was sacked trying to make plays. Our OL was questionable most of the time, but because Cam was such a great athlete, we did not prioritize protecting him. So how many healthy years did we get out of Cam? 6, if you include his rookie season, when he was learning. He was hurt in Carolina 3 seasons. A third of the time here. So bringing in a QB who can lead a young team is not a negative. Cap room is the best argument for not doing so, fwiw, but it can work.

Rhule will build the bottom of the roster--that makes you practice better, you handle injuries better, and you find gems to fill gaps and holes. I am pumped. This is a good list.

I love him--and since we are not running the Tampa 2, I wonder if we need the coverage skills he lacks? I dunno--wish I knew more about it, but Chinn was "that guy" when we needed a LBish player to cover the seam. I need to go back and watch some video, but that is how I recall it. I like Werner (Ohio State) and Landman (Colorado) too. They are just nasty, smart, somewhat limited MLBs. They do not cover that well, but they are in the box, in your face, etc.

Stafford will be eligible for the Senior Bowl in a few years.

Me too. I really like some of the Guards in this draft--We have to get one. I would not be shocked to see us walk away with 3 OL--especially since we should get 2 comp picks (5th, 6th)

You know, if 1 QB can emerge and turn the big four into the big five, it is huge.

Cool story. My son played HS basketball with David Thompson's son. Thompson came to one game, and sat near me. My son scored about 20 points in the second half and had about 14 boards--Thompson's son was terrible that night, but he did not seem to care. They barely won the game, when my son hit a 25 foot 3 pointer at the buzzer. Thompson grabbed me behind my neck and shook my head around a bit---he was excited. When I told my son, he had to Google David Thompson. He knew that his teammates' dad was a former college and pro player, but nothing else.

I hear you and I too prefer a drafted QB. But the logic is a bit misleading. You do not list the drafted QBs that stayed on their drafting teams that did not win a Super Bowl. A team that drafted their QB tends to have that QB longer than a team that signed a free agent QB, so there are more years for the drafted QB to win a Super Bowl on the team that drafted him. For example, Brady has 1 year with Tampa Bay to win the Super Bowl, and he had 20 years with New England to win the Super Bowl. Secondly, it is more likely that a free agent QB who was not signed by his draft team and allowed to hit the open market came from a team that was not winning Super Bowls. Does that mean the QB lacks the capacity to win a Super Bowl? Could it mean that the team did not surround him with talent, the coaching staff is bad, etc. Stafford took over a team that was 0-16. His last five years have been exponentially better than his first five. Taking Stafford and drafting a QB next year for 2024 gives us a smooth transition without a hiccup rookie QB season. If we are thinking long term, would a rookie developing under a veteran for a few years not be the way to go, or is rolling the dice on a drafted qb better? This is kind of like the stats that people are posting about the successful QBs not being taken in the top 10, assuming it is better to take a QB later in the draft if you look at long-term stats. The fallacy? It is probably not the QB taken in the top 10 that sucks, but the franchise drafting in the top 10. Very interesting post, by the way---it should make us think.

Just scanning the roster for the first time---I think the Panthers' coaching staff will like the following players: Tre Smith, G Tennessee Paddy Fisher, LB Northwestern William Bradley-King Edge Baylor (Because he played at Baylor) Marvin Wilson, DT Florida State (interesting because they will get to see his work ethic and learn his attitude a bit--he has dropped considerably---why?

NCFAN just posted this 2 hrs ago--you are on it: 6’5 255 with a 6’11 wingspan for BC tight end Hunter Long. Can play through contact or above the rim. Legit chance to be TE3 in the class and a top 100 pick. https://t.co/hGVvR2tF5c — Brad Kelly (@BradKelly17) January 26, 2021

I would take stumpy with country strong and toughness. No doubt his work ethic is through the roof.

He has been "rising" on the sites I read. I would not be surprised.

I am intrigued. His highlight reels can be fool's gold because he was so inconsistent. Looked great at times. Coaching? Support?

What was Kalil, 285?

He is on my day 3 short list.

Theory debunked.

Apparently, he was quarantined behind a Krispy Kreme franchise for some time. They still have problems with slobber frothing when he passes red neon signage.

In Super Bowl 38, both teams had a Western Carolina Catamount on their respective rosters (FB Hoover, WR David Patten). So maybe, just maybe....

This is how they have to think--we cannot sell the farm.

Me too. I would not trade #8--Shaq and #40. I do not think there will be as much hype for Stafford as people think--there are potentially 5 NFL starting QBs in the this draft. Then you have players like Trask and Newman, players to sit for a year or two. There will be other players available as well, like Lock, Garoppolo, Darnold, and maybe Carr- And Watson and Stafford. I would low ball the Lions and still look to get a QB--maybe a Newman or Mond--maybe. I am not going to worry--I think they will have a plan, a target, and I think we will get that player.