MHS831

On 1/5/2022 at 6:10 PM, mrcompletely11 said:

He didnt last year

He has stated that he would do it--and he entertained a trade offer last year.  Not sure that the fact that he didn't get a good offer justifies a statement that infers he will not trade back in the first round---I think he does move back this year and would probably bet on it.

11 hours ago, bobcat91 said:

Sorry, but Brady is not a long term answer at LT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Probably not, most are not.  But you have seen a few games and he was decent--while it takes rookies a while to develop.  Pretty premature assessment, if you ask me.

We tend to throw away players if they do not make that big splash.  A third rounder who has been practicing at G is moved to LT and does fairly well.  You are ready to move on after what, three/four games? 

Our glaring weakness is the IOL. Do you think BC is a G?  If so, what is that decision based on? 

Not challenging your opinion (even though this was not stated as such), but I want to know what you have heard/see that impacts your opinions.  In my mind, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic about BC at T.

I wonder what the reaction would be if the Panthers brought Rex in for an interview---I never really took him seriously as a coach, but when I hear him speak, I am usually enlightened.

Yes, we need an OL.  Does that mean the only place to find OL help is the draft?

Yes, we need a QB.  Unless we give away our first rounders for 3 years, we are not going to get a good one in free agency--which means the draft--one way or another--is going to produce our next QB.

If I thought the OL was Darnold's only major problem, I would be all in on going OL and sitting still at QB.  But he can't read defenses--he holds the ball too long---and he is quick to turn his attention from the checkdowns to the DL rushing him.  We get blitzed a lot up the gut because the league knows Darnold will be distracted by them. That is why our Guards rate so low--they are being tested the entire game.

3 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

He didnt last year

Are you telling me that Fitterer did not trade back last year?

10 hours ago, CRA said:

I have zero interest in watching our GM trade down all of the 2022 draft simply because he traded away our 22 draft picks. 

I could see him trying to trade this year's first and the 2023 and 2024 first rounders for Watson, address the OL in free agency, and we basically draft on day 3 this April.  I hope not--but I would not be surprised

1 hour ago, joemac said:

Can anybody show me 1 single instance of people catching the coof at a football game at all this year?

 Damn all this science.

21 hours ago, Basbear said:

 

 

I think they want to trade down, if not a few times and get a few of those 2s and 3s rather than one one. 

Fitterer will do it.

we can't go defense in round 1 again, but he is a good player.

33 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I wouldn't even want Matt Rhule picking the punter.

In fairness to Rhule, nobody saw the long snapper acquisition coming.  Then Boom--our practice squad has a long snapper.

late with this joke

1 hour ago, WOW!! said:

You just named 1 Olinemen.. Who were the rest??

Your counting has improved.  Now work on the Google skills.

2 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Yes let's name the 1 example where that worked out. By the same reasoning let's draft a 6th round QB and hope we get Tom Brady...

So you use one example twice to defend your point but you attack a counter example that features one example while falsely stating that it is the only example where "that worked out."  You have a dizzying intellect.

I once took it.  I wondered, licked it, and didn't feel like I scored.

4 minutes ago, frankw said:

If you don't agree that's cool keep it pushing then. It isn't my fault these decision makers folks here previously fawned over thought it was a good idea to go all defense one draft then corner the first pick on the next and then proceed to stockpile more corners. We have to take a qb this year or next regardless of the oline. Direct your ire where it belongs.

I get your point.  If you state what you think the team might do and get attacked--there is obviously some confusion surrounding the points of view.  I see this a lot.  I think the Panthers will take a QB but I would rather see a different strategy.

5 minutes ago, raleigh-panther said:

I pray to sweet baby Jesus every night that he is fired 

 

Personally, I think we will try to build the OL in free agency and we will take Pickett.  Not sure how I feel about it. 

To assume a team will not want to move up for a QB in this draft is not the best thinking. Of course, free agency could mix things up, but not enough to fill everyone's satisfaction.

Some team will fall in love with Pickett (maybe us).  Someone will want to have a run/pass threat like Corral, and some team will want Howell.  Willis might intrigue some team seeking a Jackson-ish QB.    Teams will be interested in moving up a few spots to get their guy.

I see the two pass rushers and Neal going 1, 2, 3--and I do not see a team giving up as much as it would require to trade up to 1, 2, or 3.  So the Draft trading will start around #4.  Let's say the Browns are ready to move on from Mayfield--they could take one of these QBs and and give the Panthers 13 and 45.  Do the Panthers still get a stud OL?  Yes. Do they get a second rounder?  Yes.  However, I think the Panthers will take the #1 QB on the board if he is there at #6.

the article says we beat the Eagles.  we lost by 3

  Cleveland had stud LT Joe Thomas for years and sucked consistently because they did not have a QB.

3 minutes ago, NorthTryon said:

At least his former players will get another season to live their dreams!

I like the excerpt from the Person article. "An agent who represents multiple Panthers' players called Carolina "less meritocratic" than any other team he deals with, adding the Panthers have Temple and Baylor players who wouldn't make a roster anywhere else in the league.

its about loyalty.  Cam picked up on it, and defended Rhule after being benched.  Look at his coaching staff--same thing.

10 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Even if BC isn't able to be a great guard I'm not sure i still pass on a LT that I think can be great just to keep a LT that is solid.

I get what you are saying about wasting resources but OT is one place I don't mind "wasting" a little.  It would just be hard for me to pass on a guy that I think can be a top flight LT if my current guy might top out at above average.

I almost value my OT3 as much or more than some of my starters.  How many times does someone get hurt, or they become a free agent.  Tackles are so expensive and so hard to find, especially ones that can play on the left.

How many times has a team gone into a big game and had a tackle hurt and it actually cost them? it seems to happen alot

Like you said if Rhule would have played him more this would be an easier question to answer.

 

Yeah, a little PT for Brown and Christensen would have made the offseason a bit less speculative.

33 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

or you draft the LT and you might end up with a good LT, good LG (BC), and good RT and you find an average center elsewhere.

 

 

I did think of that and it is an option.  One thing bothers me:  Why could BC not win a starting job over Jordan or Miller?  If he was a better G than T and he is playing admirably at T, why would Rhule stay with 2 bottom feeders at G?

The SOS can fluctuate--I wonder if Ellis factored that into his prognosis?  For example, the Jets SOS is .515 and the Panthers is .507--a difference of .008.  Is it not possible for the Jets' SOS to drop and the Panthers' SOS to increase during week 18?  The Jets could then win and the Panthers then lose and the Jets would not drop below the Panthers. 

I guess I am not sure how much these SOS numbers can fluctuate during the final week of the season.

6 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

To be a playoff team in the NFL you need more than a serviceable LT.  Not saying BC is or isnt but take a look at the playoff teams year in and out and they have above average tackles.  Its damn criminal that we are only going to have 3ish games worth of film on BC.  But again to me he didnt even look average vs TB and NO.  Lots of pressures against bullrushes and his feet got tangled up against speed rushers.

 

If it was me I would just pretend BC was on the team and continue to build from there.  He he works out as guard so be it.  If not he can be a backup and someone that can fill in for injuries.  I wish he would have been starting from game 7or so but it is what it is.

It seems the matter could be more clear and this debate more resolved if Rhule had just played BC--I mean, --M. Jordan was starting over him at left G, so I do not buy Rhule's statement--"BC is a starter, we just do not know exactly where yet--let me talk to my OL coach."  (I was amazed by that response).  So we are left to make assumptions.  You do need a good LT in the NFL, and I am saying that BC--after an offseason of film study weight training--could be a solid LT. P. Sewell in Detroit was moved to RT and struggled for 6 games before the light came on.  We have not given BC that much time at LEFT tackle.  So if Rhule won't play BC over M Jordan or Miller, how can anyone say that he is a starting Guard? 

As soon as this team was eliminated, a secure coach would have immediately benched underperformers (Miller, Jordan) and played the rookies (Brown, BC).  Rhule did not for some unknown reason.  If they are not good enough to replace Miller and Jordan, they probably are not the future Gs.

2 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I am not passing on the one of the top 2 Left tackles in this draft because a 25 year old rookie looks "promising" (which is debatable I guess) in a couple of games.   And to be perfectly honest I thought he looked totally overwhelmed against TB and NO. 

Remember, the last sure thing LT who was drafted by the Lions in 2021 --Sewell-- was moved to RT and struggled for the Lions first six games.  Since then, he has been the second highest rated OT in the NFL, with an 86.6 rating.   BC has averaged about 70 and is still in his first six games--and he was obviously a third rounder.  BC is a better athlete than Sewell, based on combine numbers.  So you say, "Sit him and bring in a rookie to play LT!" before he has had the chance to learn the position?  Furthermore, he has been playing beside a LG for 2 games who is very poor week after week.  If BC has another solid outing vs. TB, I say any decision to move him inside is premature.  Spending nearly all of our draft capital on LT when we might just have a good one on the roster ignores other needs.  To me, trade back and grab Tyler Linderbaum--now you have a solid C, serviceable LT, good RT, and all you need in free agency is a guard or two.