MHS831

I think the CB and OT crops are very similar, which plays to the strength of our GM. They are not loaded at the top, but very solid deep into the draft. I think there is some top-level talent at WR in the first (Strong, Parker, Cooper, White), so I would not be surprised to see us draft a WR IF one of the big 5 (DGB was eliminated from board, but he is top 5), is there. Most likely, Strong is the key. Having said that, I feel DG will have everyone squirming for OT and CB because he can find one later. If Strong is gone and a pass-rusher drops to us, we take the DE. There is some chance we take a RB in the first--a fact that might shake people up. I doubt it, but Gurley (when healthy) is awesome. Cam would be so much better if the defense has to keep 8 in the box. Just my thinking.

I really have not spent much time looking into CBs, so I appreciate the response. Personally, and I am NEVER right on this, I am guessing, since GMen filled positions in free agency (again, with cheap, high upside players), that we will draft a CB at some point. However, I would not be surprised to see Gettlemen do something like this: 1. DE 2. RB 3. WR 4. OT 5. CB 6. OT 7. S If it were me, and I was drafting solely on need, I would do something like this: 1. WR 2. OT 3. CB 4. RB 5. S 6. OT 7. OLB

Personally, I figured that 1 CB would go in the first round (Waynes) but if 3 go as suggested, I think Rollins would be the second or third CB taken, not Darby. However, we often base our opinions on the opinions of the sites we use to research players. I can say that the middle rounds seem ideal for finding value at CB. It has been our MO to find a talent who runs a slow 40 time and get them later than their play warrants--Norman and Benwikere were both 4.6 combine guys. Here is the thing about Benwikere that I do not get- People say, "He played well on the outside, but we need to find an outside guy and move him back to nickel." Outside guys are so hard to find, why not draft a nickel? The draft is really packed through all seven rounds if all you need is a nickel. I do not see us drafting a CB early. Remember, they spent a lot of time talking to the Tennessee CB (Coleman, was it?) at the SR bowl. He is projected on day 3. We have a plan at CB for the draft because we did not bring in anyone in free agency. White is a good reserve, they seemed to like Byndum, so how severe is the need? We will find out, but do not look for us to go after an elite talent/lockdown (unless they plan to move away from Nornan), because this team is not built to need expensive CBs.

We want a dominant running attack. Stew has an injury history and we all doubt he can run as hard as he did in 2014 for a full 16-game schedule. Tolbert? Not an every down back and frankly, he is getting a bit sluggish--as he should for a back with this age and weight. Whittaker? If Stew goes down, and I almost guarantee it, Whittaker would be the feature back for all intents and purposes. What would help this offense more than a LT or a WR? Quite possibly, a stud RB. We have Oher, and reason to think he will play LT, we have Ginn now, and maybe they want to Move Brown to #2 and Cotchery to #3 (Lot to be said about players not being rookies any more). Gmen is kicking the tires, thinking outside the box. I hope he is thinking Gurley in the second, however. Devalued position, injury--not in the first, please.

I can't help but remember how many people were furious when we drafted him-- Not to say that some were wrong, but to say that he has done a hell of a job winning over this fan base.

And others are offering opinions of him based on his days in Philly. They signed him based on the progress he made lately, so put his baby photo albums up. People change. He even said, "I feel that I am ready to start." which suggests that he has been a developmental project.

Not sure I understood too many of the points made in the preceding post. Not here to take shots at Mr. Scot. His opinion doesn't threaten me because he never forces it on me or undeserving others.

Actually, it does not take a sage to answer your questions-- High of 79 and no chance of rain December 18, 2015

Lafell and Johnson--the Allstate good hands team.

Here is what some of you don't get---Players have to fit into a system to be productive. A coaching style (kinetic vs. verbal, for example) means a lot to some. Supporting cast plays a role. What I do not see on this thread is people saying Coleman will be great--they are excited about his potential and his versatility. He is costing this team $1.4m per season, so there is reason to believe we possibly have a deal here. I am reading people saying that he sucks, blows. etc. That is just dumb--he doesn't--he has proven that. Just admit you don't know and move on. Or don't post.

Funny how Hardy is totally innocent because we have no first hand knowledge (except the findings of a judge) but, without any firsthand knowledge of Holder, we can safely and accurately accuse her of being a coke addict, committing perjury, and extorting millions from an innocent victim afraid of soiling his good name. Dolts.

This^ I think it is typical that, after mentioning that he is finally getting it, turning the corner, hitting his stride, etc. we have people coming on here to say, "He sucked in Philly...." (they are only parroting what they heard or read). 3 coaches in his career--maybe a reason for a late start. There is little downside and a ton of upside for him. I like his confidence too. A guy who doesn't say that is probably content to play a reserve role. This guy has 10 career ints. Considering the situation, I will take this.

Nice to see the guys hanging out together. Offense vs Defense, Ohio St vs. Alabama----Panthers. I hope he steps up. He is not a fluid player, and he is not a smart (instinctive) player--however, maybe he also has a relationship with Harper.

Now go away, little boy. Not going to respond to your snarky comments any longer because laughing at your attempt at wit has become boring. Probably past your bed time anyway.

Yes, it was choc full of panther news. Keep it up, scoop.

Really not Panther related--these guys talk about the Panthers but their content is not about the Panthers so who gives a sh? Who really has time to follow their twitter comments--or a reason to care?

You really don't comprehend reading well, do you? Keep living the lie and you will be fine--tell people you own your parents' house and you are letting them live with you, tell them that your prom date in the picture is not your sister, and tell everyone that the tassel hanging from the rear-view mirror of your AMC Pacer is from your high school graduation instead of some discarded curtains. People would believe that stuff if they don't know you well.

I am not here to praise Stewart either. They both had their moments, but they both were paid too much. At least Stewie was not going to be making millions as a 32-year old RB getting 3.5 yards per carry.

For a back who only cracked the 1000 yard mark twice in nine seasons, you could argue that he was a Stealer here too. Be here all week. Try the veal.

He could play TDs spot and move TD to the other side to prolong his career. He could be our next SS. If I could get a player like this, I might take my chances on a #2 WR being there in the second round and a T in the third.

DeAngelo played 4 sixteen game seasons (of nine). He fumbled as much in his last 37 games (final 3 seasons) as he did in the six seasons before that. He had 2 seasons where he rushed for over 1000 yards. His numbers (rushing totals) have been decreasing each year since 2011. It was time. I have said it many times: If I were a GM, I would not keep a RB on a second contract (unless it was cheap). They rarely earn them. Spend the $$ on the OL.

Don't blame someone for judging him when his parting shots go viral.

Yeah, and I really think that he tries to set up the BPA approach in free agency. I simply think it means he will not reach. Since I question the quality of OTs in the draft's early stages, I would bet that we do not take one in the first round. I bet we take a WR again. He has filled holes with people, so, as you say, lets watch. We are still learning him. I love what he is doing, personally.

Believe what you want, but since you don't know the Panther's board, you are only guessing. but if your theory is true, it is possible that a CB could be atop the board every round. So are you saying we would draft 7 CBs? What if the BPA is a 3-4 OLB? Everything Gettlemen says is subject to some degree of interpretation. He is under no obligation to be completely transparent, and you do not know what he means when he says "Best." Best to you may mean best player, but best to him may mean "best fit". We drafted a WR first last year when we had nothing in the cupboard. Coincidence? Hell no.

This makes for an interesting debate, that is for sure. OK, I see your point, but the board is influenced by need. It is a crazy theory, but I don't think any GM truly means that. The reason I think that, MG, is because they take positions off the board after they draft a position (Not sure if DG does, but I have heard others say it). For example, they took all DEs off their board after drafting Ealy last year. If you were the GM and you know our need for OT, would you really take Bryce Petty (QB, Baylor) if he is there on your board and right under him sits Daryl Williams (OT Oklahoma). Perry might be rated the higher player according to the team's system, but he is not going to be the best player on this team. He would simply compete with Webb and Anderson for the clipboard. The obvious question then is, "Why would the Panthers have QBs on the board at all?" Then you get into need going into the creation of the board. I have a feeling that we will draft a WR very early. We will draft an OT or 2. If they are not atop the board., Gettlemen has to grab them because they are not sitting in free agency and decent talent is not likely to be cut. I really see your point, but I guess I am going on human nature. I don't think a pre-draft rule is concrete, without a certain amount of fluidity---which is consistent with your last statement. I think we are saying the same thing, just disagree about the degree the rule is bent.