MHS831

I think picks 3-5 were on point--nothing spectacular, but solid. But XL was the WR I was hoping we would not pick--to me, he was the fool's gold--and I would never have drafted a Rb with the second round pick--we had other more pressing needs.

Mays played well. I watched him, expecting a let down, and he got better each week. Mays was a better pass blocker than both guards.and Corbett. Discuss.

Ice is right--this says more about Morgan than Dane.

kinda like Tito.

You can protect 4 players on the PS from week to week. I had to Google it.

I watch it as much as a I can. I think this year, you will see some risers at the QB and WR positions. I like it because it gives us more info on the prospects and then a week or two later, free agency--after free agency, we have a lot better idea of needs and mocking gets real. Mocking in April is something you have to prepare for. You have no excuses. It is mock, or be mocked.

I am QB insecure. I mean, all you have to do is look at the Panther royal blood line to know why--How many people thought Sam Darnold was back before the Lions game? I did. I was like, "The light finally came on. No more darkness. No more ghosts." Then the Lights went out in Detroit and the ghosts came back for his final two games. How would you like to be the Vikings GM right now? At least they have a QB in waiting. I think we all see a direct correlation between Darnold and OL play. In Charlotte, Bryce started getting it when his OL started playing well, specifically, the IOL. Are we set at QB because Bryce went on a 10 game hot streak? I think we are, but little people see ghosts too. I would have a list of developmental QBs that could be available on day 3. If one is there, if you are not confident that Plummer will ever become more than he is, I would take one. Yes, we have other needs. But most day 3 picks don't last and a QB with undeveloped talent might be the way to go. Rourke, for example. Quick release, winner.

perhaps this thread could use a lock down? Just a suggestion. I was thinking there was some Panther news--Not Cougar news.

I am just spitballing here--let it play out and I will go to bed: Let's say Mahome's contract comes due and he insists on $100m per season. Is there a team that would find the money to pay it? Would KC? It was in 2015 (I think) when Cam was getting $20m and it was hard to grasp. In the past decade, the price of a franchise QB has tripled. Then the next QB bases his contract on the Mahomes deal. The trend has been the last QB contract is the highest. I see nothing to discourage that trend--Greed can destroy a league. Personally, I don't watch baseball any more, and the NBA has a small group of about 8 teams that appear on national TV and they have players who make more than some eastern block countries. Ticket prices go up---and we are headed for pay-per-view very soon across the board-

I don't know--they represent the entire body of players and, if it got to that point, a vote of all veterans and rookies who are part of the union. The members of the union that are getting less so that QBs and Edges make more. If the elite players are getting 50% of all cap increases, the non-elite players with shorter careers might want a bigger slice of the pie and vote accordingly. To say that the Union would not go for it is not something I agree with--it would be the union that proposes it--based on a proposal and a majority vote. If the veteran players vote for an equal distribution framework, then all 53 on a roster benefit from a cap increase that is applicable to the entire team. Not sure how labor laws might be impacted...

If it could be done, it probably would have by now. However, I think the QBs' salary is getting ridiculous.

I do too. if it were phased in, however, like the rookie cap, maybe. If it came from the union, it would be a majority vote. the big salaried members would lose. SUre there are other legal concerns.

exactly. I like Stewart--you can slide him inside to the 5 tech and bring in a smaller 9 tech on passing downs.

I guess the salaries for QBs and the other players in the top 5% will be getting richer. They really need caps for players on the roster. 2 players earn up to $25m 3 players earn up to 20m 5 players earn up to 10m etc. Players union should insist on this.

I don't know if that is hair gel for seniors or he simply rubs his head while applying arthritis cream.

good post. covers it all.

Not sure how much wear and tear he took compared to aging QBs like Rodgers, Stafford, Cousins, or Russell Wilson, for example, since Dalton spent a lot of his career as a backup. But yes, "meh." if you lose your starter. I hope that a Brock Purdy is sitting there late day 3. I think you can protect your 3rd qb on the PS--emergency qb, or something like that. In other words, still add a young QB to complete, but for now, have him compete with Plummer.

Yes. What we tend to forget is that we are talking about a 23.5 year old kid. I think most of us would have folded after the 2023 season and then being benched after two games in 2024. Lotta pressure. So I am not in the "mental midget" camp, but I see that possibility. I think he developed some scar tissue, but I do believe he is still fragile and will see a slump in the future--how will he react? When Bryce was threw a TD at the end of 2024, it was believed that he was smiling and pointing at Dalton, who was doing the same back.

In my view, Fitterer was the worst. I can't think of a good decision he ever made. In free agency, deplorable. Drafting? yikes. He took Horn over Surtain, re-signed Donte Jackson to a big deal, and signed Safties (low hanging fruit) Woods and Bell. beyond that? To me, nothing says it better than this: "The Rams offered two future first-round picks — in 2024 and ’25 — plus a third in ’23 for Burns, who was in the midst of a career-best, 12 1/2-sack season." Where would we be now had that deal been made?

Since I PROVED to you that the "prime" for a T is not based on average career length and he has knee concerns (as you know, a big man with knee issues is not good) you would have to speculate his value over the next 3 years (2025-2027). My guess would be a 3 year (combine 2025 salary with 2026 and 2027 new money), $55-60m extension with only about $35m guaranteed. That would still drop our cap hit (from $31 to $20m for 2025) as much as cutting him would (almost). I would not guarantee it much more than the $31m he is set to receive. From Moton's perspective, he has to know that he is not as marketable as a 32-year old free agent as now, so the opportunity to make $$ at the high end of the pay scale for a 32-year old tackle would be appealing. Morgan would also have an out, since the extension was front loaded and only $35m guaranteed. Not sure if this is a deal both sides would do or if it is doable, but in my crazy world--it is a groovy idea. If his knee gets worse this year, he would not get a third contract anyway, and if it does not, he has $40m waiting for him. Just pure speculation--what were you thinking?

I just don't think Persons is in the loop. I worked weekends at the Observer a long time ago in the Sports Department and I can tell you that the guy I worked with the most, Rick Bonnell, was in the loop. He knew stuff long before it happened. In fact, when it was rumored (I wrote about this a few days ago) that Valvano was going to the NBA, Rick called VALVANO. Joe just reads tweets from other reporters he follows. There is a trust between a team and the reporter--and if you violate it--you get shut out. Repeating rumors or injecting your gut feelings with no more credibility than anyone on this board is not journalism, and teams (pro, college, etc) will not give you information that provides insights into a developing story. Rick told me, "It is like dancing at a ball--they lead, you follow, and you do not cause them to misstep." I never forgot things he told me. David Poole used to cover NASCAR and he knew all kinds of interesting things that came true, but he never revealed these things until they became news. I see Person as a clown, a 50-year old boy scout looking for merit badges. His fluff, if you go back, is usually 50/50 and he is not right most of the time. I also worked for the Capital Newspaper in Annapolis Maryland and used to use my press pass to sit in the press box and eat free food and watch the Orioles while pretending to cover the game. That is where I met some REAL sports reporters. The Baltimore Sun--even recently, they were breaking Panther stories before the Panther reporters were.

Just say "I don't know" and move on. "Possibly. But there is a chance..." No poo.

Joe is vibing now? He is interpreting vibes and sharing his vibeness with his readership? Nice work, gumshoe. Thanks for digging into your plethora of contacts and sources and giving us your vibes.

I see where you can make the argument that he was not that bad, but when he was not influence by a coach--the Clausen draft--when Fox was a Lame Duck as the team anticipated the draft, he was pretty much empowered without practical input. I realize that he had scouts, but he did not have a vision. He had already traded away the first rounder the year before, and when Clausen was there after the first round, it later came out that he tried to trade up to #33 with the Rams to get him, probably dealing away another first rounder. When KC and Minnesota--both desperate for QBs--passed on Clausen in the second round, I figured that was a red flag--what did they know? Of course, we drafted Clausen, and then Lafell in the third round, and then I read a story that the Colts bluffed Hurney into moving up to take Armanti Edwards so convince him to draft a player they did not want. The Colts source joked that there was a run on WRs and they were hoping to get one to fall to them so they put out the word that they were interested in Armanti Edwards. It is believed that they wanted Emanuel Sanders or Eric Decker, but they were taken before the Panther pick. Having already taken a WR in the third round, it seemed unlikely that they would pick another, so they forgot about it. Most teams had a much lower grade (7th round) on Edwards. When it was announced that Hurney took Edwards, they laughed. Nobody can be sure if their pressure worked, but the reveal here is that they laughed at him (if true--I doubt it, to be honest). In the fourth round, he picked Eric Norwood, a tweener who did not fit the 4-3. I get that was one draft, but it was a demonstration of Hurney without parental controls. I went to Spartanburg that summer, and Fox was being openly sarcastic. He had Clausen at #3 QB and he made a sarcastic comment I could easily hear about Armanti when he dropped a jugs machine punt. Having talked to Fox at OTAs before, I really liked him and felt that he was a true, old school football guy. And yes, I heard they hated Gettlemen. I see why. I think players retired because of him. To me, the bigger question and picture is this: You have hours of tape of these players playing football in college against future NFL players. You weigh them, you measure them, you time them, you interview them, and you work them out. Why is the first round a coin toss? Why is the second round a 75% chance of failure? It makes no sense to me. I appreciate your admiration for Hurney and since we do not see GMs as a whole group but an isolated situation in most cases, it is easy to attribute failure to the man who picks in the draft when the majority of players drafted on all teams fail. He sealed his fate when he started dealing first rounders away. That was his strength.

I mean, the QB position is finally heading in the right direction. not the time to stir the pot. Nope, skeptics, you are not getting any rookie who would be better as a backup than Andy. Not many teams win with QB2. I still say if a Rourke, Will Howard, Gabriel, or McCord falls into day 3, you take him.