MHS831

1 minute ago, BeenPounding said:

I'm warming up the the idea of a WR in the first round.  It's a toss up there between WR and DT.  I'm trade back all day if possible.

I like Shelton or Crownover even if we need to go a round early.  2nd round is a prime spot for a LB if it is Hill, Rodriguez, or Golday.

CB is a sneaky need.  There are a bunch of nickel guys, but I'd rather hit on a tall boundary corner.  My perfect draft hit on sticktothemodel:

I am too.  You have to consider how a player would make others around him better.  A S, for example, could make the back 4-5 secondary players better.  An Inside LB makes the front 7 better. 

A WR would make Bryce and TMac better.

(I like Caden Curry too, as well as Crownover)

I have mocked your first two picks more than once.  I like OTs converted to C like Parker from Duke because they could play OT in a pinch.  However, the C wealth in this draft is sick.

17 minutes ago, csx said:

Not going to play is a huge dose of wishful thinking. He could start every game due to injury. We are one injury away from Stone Cold Forsythe being a starter and one season away from needing a true starter if not two.

Why draft Aaron Rodgers? Why draft Mahhomes? Because  you have to think and see beyond the end of your nose 

I am aware.  We are 1 injury away from Kenny Pickett too--does that mean we should draft Simpson?  

So you are saying that the Panthers should draft an OT and that is the only course of action a responsible GM would take?

You are not wrong, CSX, but to me, timing, other needs, the Ickey situation, etc. make it more complicated than you are making it.  

21 minutes ago, csx said:

There are a number of tackles graded and mocked in our area. We've had contact with several.

You seem to be looking for a perfect prospect at 19 and using draft media negatives bullet points to rule everyone out.  

You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1.  I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter.  So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate.  QBs are a great example.  Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith.  Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach.

I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there?  Wharton (280lbs)?  So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover?  A deep free safety?  A quality center? A playmaking TE?  A DT to replace Robinson?  A wide receiver to balance the secondary?  Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right.  Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.  

Nuff said.

22 minutes ago, csx said:

Proctor wouldn't be a reach based on the draft grades or any big board or prodoect ranking. His grade is essentially the same grade as Sadiq.

Im not specifically pushing for him just using the resources we have access to understand generally perceived value.

 

I think, based on what I guess GMs are thinking, that he is LT #2.  He sure takes a steep drop vs. speed rushers--that bothers me, but hey, you get it back in other ways.  I would be happy if that is what they think we need to do.  To me, it would me that they are not expecting Ickey to return to form OR Moton's knee is worse than we hoped.  (reading tea leaves).  

3 hours ago, Swaggasaurus said:

Fantastic post. But if the draft was purely analytical everyone would know the next pick. There’s projection there. Mauigoa has started every game of his career, Freeling has 17 career starts. It’s totally a gamble to pick Freeling, but you do it because he has reps out there that are perfect and the frame and athleticism are perfect although his experience and play to date are far from perfect. 
 

Proctor, for me, still has a level to unlock. He needs to drop another 20-30. He’s played transfer games with Alabama, an incredibly unserious football program in its current state. There’s an insurance policy there as well that he could work out a guard if he doesn’t work at tackle. If Proctor is picked at 19, he has a chance to compete for a starting gig, he’s got 4 tool ability.

I definitely understand the "draft a T" move--it is just not what I would do right now in this situation.  thanks

This is a good thread--I definitely see both sides--just explaining how I feel on April 3...Nice to have civil discourse.  

I worry about the OT situation, but I do not expect to see them invest a  first rounder after signing a starter until they get information about Ickey.  I see drafting Moton's depth, but not if you reach in round 1 to do it.

WR?  I am not happy with them either--the best WR in the draft was the second best WR on his team and the second best was a slot.

Edge?  Deep in this draft.  Want to build your future?  Take advantage of the deep talent pool at edge.  

LB? I love the expected day 2 collection. 

C?  The draft is deep and round 3 and after  is when to shop. 

Yes, we need a tackle and when we know more, we can be more strategic. IMO

3 hours ago, csx said:

OL or DL is my preference. Its a proven approach that doesn't involve racking your brain with analysis . Keep the trenches stocked. Especially over another WR. We are over due to invest draft capital there.

It is simple if you focus only on OT.  But there is the cap, talent levels that differ from year to year, and team needs that fluctuate, as you know.  While I would be happy with an OT and understand it, I am not sold on OT as the answer. I agree that the game is won or lost in the trenches, but I do not think over-drafting with the first round pick is the only way of addressing it--especially if it may be a year before you know what you have or reap the rewards.  We both agree that you have to stay ahead of it.  Just because you take a T in round 1 does not mean that you have met the need. Teams need qbs too, but drafting them too early in round one is usually disastrous

A few weeks ago, I was high on Freeling.  I still am (cautiously), but there are reasons to approach some of these tackles with a "Buyer Beware" approach.  Again, I am not against drafting an OT in round 1, but not if that OT has a late first or second-round grade.  That is not good value.  On top of that, put him in the garage for a year?  Take Freeling, for example.  Some project him to Cleveland at 6.  Really?  He is a fringe first rounder, IMO.  IF you want to give away draft capital to get a non-starter, that is how GMs get fired.

First, we can address Freeling’s seemingly massive improvement in pass protection. He did earn an outstanding 86.1 PFF pass-blocking grade in 2025, which ranked seventh among qualified FBS tackles. That was an improvement over his 65.3 mark in 2024. Georgia’s passing game was heavily built on play action and screens, which allowed Freeling to partake in just 95 true pass sets all season. That ranked just barely among the top 200 tackles in the country.  

Freeling earned a solid 75.4 PFF pass-blocking grade on those true pass set reps, but that pales in comparison to top tackles in the class, such as Francis Mauigoa and Spencer Fano. Mauigoa earned his 85.8 true PFF pass-blocking grade, second best in the nation, across 212 such reps, more than twice as many as Freeling.   What about Freeling's run blocking?  61.3--which is slightly above all tackles in the country.  So if you draft Freeling in round 1, you are getting a guy whose numbers were padded by play action and screens--but in pure passing sets and in run blocking, he was average when compared to every tackle in the country.

Elite?  Buyer beware.

Lomu?  Athletic, Can struggle in the run game and against power rushers.  Late first rounder-early second, imo.  Arms less than 34", which could scare some teams.

Proctor?  Can play high and the weight could be a problem he fights.  Personally, I see him as the best option for an immediate starter but his ceiling is lower.  

I realize all players have areas of concern, but I think you will see some of these OTs drop on draft day, with good reason.  

Fano?  32 inch arms may kick him inside to G.

You will respond that all OTs have question marks, and they do--but not researching the situation is not the answer.  Freeling is a stud athlete, and despite the stats, I like him, but not as depth at 19.  Proctor?  I get it if you needed your starter now, and speed rushers give him fits.  To adjust, his angle to block a 9 tech is nearly 90 degrees when it needs to be closer to 45 degrees.  That decreases the pocket, and a short QB can't have that. 

14 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Feels like they just changed like 2 years ago.

They had the abbreviated airport name on the chest--ATL  Which I translated to mean "Another terrible Loss" -- I suggested that they put "28-3" on their sleeves to commemorate their last Super Bowl appearance, but they rejected my proposal.

7 minutes ago, csx said:

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-success-why-building-through-the-nfl-draft-is-the-key

 

Conclusions drawn

This article took a deep dive into evaluating recent offensive line trends regarding the draft and free agency while incorporating team success into the equation. Here are the biggest takeaways:

 

The best offensive lines in football (PHI, DET, TB) were built through the draft in the early rounds

Other teams (most notably LAC) are following the same approach in team building

Offensive line is something a team should target in the early rounds (1-3), as the success rate significantly declines in the later rounds both in the short and long-term

Offensive tackles have a higher success rate through the draft than interior offensive linemen, regardless of round

Acquiring free agent offensive line does have its benefits, particularly for elite units filling one hole. Interior offensive is typically the way to go

Top-end offensive line talent is far less likely to be available via trade or free agency compared to other positions year to year, only emphasizing the importance of the draft

 

My words: we were forced to make some big signings on interior after years of poor OL drafting and neglect. It worked but isnt sustainable. We need to get right. Drafting tackles high is a successful formula. We need to start now to have any hope going forward.  

I definitely see your point, but the issue to me is this:  Do we have the immediate urgency right now to draft a T in round 1 when there are other positions that could use starters from the draft?   Secondly, I find this draft to be weak this year, with about 14 players with first round grades (arguably).  I do not think the OTs in this draft are average, but there are more of them considered to be first round candidates based on the weakness of this draft.  Since we have 2 proven starters, maybe we should draft a project later and if we have the need next year, draft the OT then?  Your facts are indisputable, but we have to take our situation and the availability of talent at OT in 2026.  This is a very debatable topic--so I definitely see your view.

It kinda looks like a generic Cardinals uniform to me.  I guess the news is they are ditching the black jerseys.

And I think this will be their alternative helmet:

Let's say we have a LT for 2026, because we do.  After that, let's say Ickey could be back and we would have the option of extending Walker.  That too is truth.  Don't get me wrong--I LOVE drafting OL, but drafting a first-round OT now is either wasting the money we just paid for a free agent OR it is like paying top dollar for a new car and keeping it in your garage for a season.  A first rounder should give us 4-5 years of cap relief by playing from day 1.

I shall elaborate here:

Teams obviously get desperate for OTs and if they enter the draft without 2 solid tackles, they are almost obligated to reach for a first round OT.  This year, I see 1 OT who is probably worth first-round consideration, and I am not putting him in the top 10 players in the draft.  Lomu, Freeling, Miller, and Proctor, for example, probably and arguably have second-round value.  So why would you reach for an OT in round 1 when you already have starters at both T positions but you have other needs?

We do need depth, however, and I think there is decent OT depth that needs development on day 3. They are no slouches, by the way.  

Drew Shelton (could drop to round 4): Surrendered 1 sack as Penn State's LT in 2025. 33 3/8" arms.  Pass pro improved every year (4 years--experienced).  "For a team running a zone-heavy scheme that values lateral movement and reach-blocking ability over phone-booth mauling, Shelton has real appeal. He is not a plug-and-play starter, but the athletic tools and the clear year-over-year improvement suggest a player who can develop into a capable starter if a coaching staff invests in his strength base and cleans up his technique. The ceiling depends entirely on how much stronger he can get and whether his feet can stay alive after initial contact."  

Austin Barber  (could drop to round 4): I see him as a RT at best and a probable kick inside to Guard where his strengths would switch from secondary to primary tools.  Considering Lewis and Hunt may be gone in a year or two, this would give the Panthers a chance to work him at RT and then move him inside if he is not effective, and there is confidence that G may be his best position.

Jude Bowery (4th round projection) was LT on a Boston College OL that was effective in the run game.  Bowery is one of the most athletic OTs in the draft.  His arms are not ideal but not too short (33.75") to play LT.  He surrendered 2 sacks. He is raw, and needs some technical refinement with his hands.  I think he has the best upside and value for this offense.  

Dametrious Crownover  TexAM (5th round projection; 35 3/8" arms) is one of the more fascinating developmental tackles in this class because the physical tools are legitimately rare. A strong run blocker who should be better in pass protection with his tools.  "You do not find many 6-7, 336-pound men with that foot speed and who have the athletic background of a converted tight end. When everything clicks, he looks like a starting right tackle in a gap-heavy run scheme, smothering defenders at the point of attack and using his length to erase speed off the edge. The 2024 tape, when he anchored one of the best rushing attacks in the SEC, is the version of Crownover that gets offensive line coaches excited."  THIS is the kind of player our coaches could develop until Moton is done.

Isaiah World  (Oregon, injured ACL in playoffs, 5th round projection--could slide to 6th).  World will not play much if at all in 2026, which is why he might fall.  For the Panthers' purposes, however, this would give the OL coaches time to work with him.

"What made World intriguing coming out of Eugene was the untapped ceiling, a fifth-year transfer who arrived as the top-ranked offensive tackle in the portal and looked the part for stretches. The improvement he showed against Big Ten competition in his one Oregon season was real, and the physical foundation, length, athleticism, and improving technique in pass protection, is still there. The ACL tear suffered in the College Football Playoff semifinal against Indiana doesn't erase that, but it changes the conversation significantly."

"That said, the investment argument isn't crazy for the right organization. This is still a tackle with first-round portal grades and the kind of athletic profile that doesn't just disappear. A team with patience and a strong offensive line room can afford to stash World on the roster, let him develop his lower-body power and pad-level consistency during the recovery process, and potentially unlock a starting-caliber right tackle somewhere in his second or third season. The path is longer now, but the destination hasn't changed for a scout willing to bet on the physical tools."

You get the idea. If we do not need the OT immediately, draft one later and develop him as depth and for next season.  Most college players drafted in round 1 were not first rounders if they had entered the draft the year before,  so why not grab a player with upside?

Personally, I don't think so.  Here is why:

Blocking--our T situation could need help.  A 245 lb back can help.

If we keep a RB in to block and release, we are able to release a TE without chipping the speed rusher more.  It sure seems as if we are going to address a pass-catching TE.

Short yardage. 

4 minutes ago, strato said:

 

the job isn’t finished.  We are paper thin on OL and the cupboard is bare for the future, as well. It screams for a quality T in the draft. If the opportunity is there, passing on one in favor of a pass catcher would be a mistake.  IMO. 

yep, and how many combinations of the OL did we have last year?  Our free agents are decent, but they could digress in this offense.

On 3/31/2026 at 11:32 AM, ForJimmy said:

Rodriguez please!  Hill would be nice too.

hes a good fit

1 hour ago, mrcompletely11 said:

But that doesnt mean you keep spending prime capital trying to do so

IN the past, 2 have been enough in carolina==with a sure-handed slot.

XL should feel like crap.  Anyone with his skills should be successful by now.  Instead, we need 3 quality WRs that other teams fear.  If not, TMac gets doubled.  Coker?  does not really run the entire route tree.  We need 3...

3 hours ago, Basbear said:

Weeks ago I tried to warm the huddle that WR/slot/TE was in play for 19, mainly 19 since the number state its correct.

I mean Matt millen drafted a QB at #2 overall.

Then the next three he used on WRs.......

Odds have Panthers to copy this..... 

Another thing--Dan tips his hand a bit when he loads one side of the ball in free agency--then he uses the draft.

He addressed Edge, LB, S, with starting-level players.  On offense, he let starters Mays and Rico go-- we lost Nijman, and Ickey, XL is possibly a bust--it makes sense that he leans into the offense this draft.

3 hours ago, Basbear said:

Weeks ago I tried to warm the huddle that WR/slot/TE was in play for 19, mainly 19 since the number state its correct.

I mean Matt millen drafted a QB at #2 overall.

Then the next three he used on WRs.......

Odds have Panthers to copy this..... 

Yet we mocked you.  Look who's laughing now!

I am still not TE warm, but I sense they might take a duck.  He would change the offensive packages more than any other position, imo.  

4 hours ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

very good read from Joe

and notable that Canales says the Panthers want to bring in players "that will complement what Bryce does" - 

RBs, WRs, and OL who can tackle?

Just kidding.  On a roll.

2 hours ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

And now you know why I broke up with her---she sounds nasal at times.  Once I told a joke and when she was laughing, she snorted.  Deal breaker.

23 hours ago, Cpt slay a ho said:

We trade up for Caleb Downs 

that is mine--he could drop to 10 or so--if so, we could.  

I also think we are looking at moving Smith Wade to FS--and if so, we could daft a  CB.  But if downs falls, he is the pick.

23 hours ago, Aussie Tank said:

KC Conception 

I think they like him---that will tell us a lot about XL.  

My shock move?  trade up for an Ohio State player (Styles or Downs)

27 minutes ago, Basbear said:

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-announces-new-playing-rules-bylaws-resolutions-for-2026

 

2026 Approved Playing Rules Summary

1. By Competition Committee; to permit the kicking team to declare an onside kick at any time during the game.
2. By Competition Committee; to eliminate the kicking team's incentive to intentionally kick the ball out of bounds when kicking off from the 50-yard line.
3. By Competition Committee; to modify the kickoff alignment requirements for the receiving team players in the setup zone.

4-A. By Competition Committee; to allow League personnel to consult with on-field officials when considering disqualifications for both flagrant football acts and non-football acts without being called on the field.

5. By Competition Committee; for one year only, to allow the NFL Officiating department to correct clear and obvious mistakes made by on-field officials that impact the game, in the event that there is a work stoppage involving the game officials represented by the NFL Referees Association.

Thanks for this....Why not just eliminate kickoffs unless there is an onside kick?