TD alt

No, I don't think Hubbard is going anywhere, just talking to my fellow dawg.

To be fair Etienne didn't get a whole lot of opportunities. The miniscule body of work (20 carries), however, did produce 94 yards and a 4.7 average. I guess we can conclude that he's decent depth. Could be running on the bubble though as special teams was a little sketchy.

Old man If is dead and stiff. But, to play the game, If Icky returns back up to par and if Walker is extended, and if Moton can play in 16 games and if he is extended, and if we decide to sign one of the four expected free agent tackles, two of which who also grade in in the low 80s just like Moton and another in the mid 70s, then we'll be alright. I mean, all the "ifs" are ultimately born of speculation. 2026 is so far setting up to be better than 2025. People are positive about our chance of winning the division, and that's before they see what we draft later in the month. There's always more than one way to get to where you want to go.

There is like one pro-ready tackle according to most scouts, and even his arm length has been in discussions, as well as Fano's and Proctor's. Fano basically has 32" arms (my goodness!). The optimal arm length is 34 inches. When Rashawn Slater came in, he had short arms, but was technically elite. The closest one to him, who is technically sound is Mauigoa. All the others have work to do. When you add it all up, they may have to move to guard. The only one that I think is a slam dunk to play left tackle is Freeling, though Miller has that possibility but will likely stay on the right. Either way, there is a huge possibility, if not a downright likelihood, that neither would unseat our projected starters during the coming season. Lastly, for all this "potential crisis" talk about tackles, the 2027 class is expected to be strong and deep.

Admittedly I did not. Just going by what I remember in a Panther uniform. I know that we're Panthers fans and appreciate Ginn's stay with us, but If we're being honest, Ginn was a bust. That's why he played for so many teams. And, I still say he wasn't as explosive or twitchy as Concepcion.

I can't see it. Ginn was very smooth, but in no way was he really elusive. He'd just catch it and outrun you with world class speed. He was largely a one-trick pony. No one was going to catch him. Concepcion is elusive and simply more explosive. That release off the line is wicked and he is just a savvier route runner and grittier overall. He didn't win the Paul Hornung award for nothing.

I seriously doubt the Chargers are going to let him go for basically nothing, notwithstanding that he hasn't really lived up to his potential. Honestly, he has just as many if not more questions than when he came into the league. He was overdrafted.

Yep. Not really the point though, which is we're not drafting a Center in the first round under any circumstance. The positional value just isn't there.

Whatever you say. It's a deep wr class that should produce several good receivers. According to Matt Harmon and other respected analysts, it wouldn't be a shocker if Concepcion ends up the best in the class.

I didn't know you were in the Panthers' FO.

I'm not calling names, but Concepcion was compared to Keenan Allen in this very thread.

If you say so. All that is is coach-speak. Center may be addressed, and it may even be likely, but it won't be in the first.

I mean, I hear you guys saying "UDFA," but I could see using a later day 3 pick on him. Round five and especially rounds 6 and 7 are highly speculative anyway.

And what words are you referring to? How about the fact that in his own words, he basically said that in the money rounds, we ain't drafting for depth, but players that can make an impact from day one?

You're just being negative. Fortner is a solid center and plus pass protector. Walker is a plus pass protector and a meh run blocker. Give me pass protection over run blocking any day of the week, especially for BY9. We already have one bust at WR, one above average guy--when he's in--and a merry band of dudes who've done comparatively little in the pros. Talk about a crisis if T-mac were to go down for any appreciable amount of time...

Really, isn't that what I just said? Why would a QB be high on your board if you already have one? QBs may may be valued more overall, as they are central to a team's success, but they also have a high bust rate along with other premium positions, but the difference is is that you have to generally pay way more for them one way or another. So, you stay away, unless you just can't for whatever reasons.

I'll just take the super processor. If he could get to that, I think we'd all be feeling better about his future. Not holding my breath though. More likely to hold my nose. I haven't completely given up though.

Everybody has their wishlist, but I'm not sure that Fano is going to be better than Miller, Freeling or Proctor. Rodriguez is a dawg, but he's no Luke. I would love to get him though.

BPA is not a myth. You think that these teams don't have their boards up and ready to go on draft night? BPA is in reference to a team's board. The positional value, character, off-field concerns and all that other stuff is built-in. Hell, some players don't even make a team's board more than likely due to being questionable human beings. You see, I don't get the "Bryce argument." I think that's weak within this context. You do what's best for the team. Always! If you perceive that an OT is best for the team, you draft him. If you perceive a WR is best for the team, you draft him. If you perceive that a safety is best, you draft him, etc. Bryce, just by virtue of being on the team is going to be more successful.

Yeah, but being "even" is a different argument. Of course you're going to take the player that you need more if all things are equal. That's a no-brainer.

I just don't see that as being in the realm of reality, but in theory if the tackle is the BPA, then sure. Like I just said in another thread, sometimes it's not a matter of being right or wrong, but just putting the puzzle pieces together to make it work. All this sh¡t is guess work, it's just that the professionals have more educated guess work.

I don't know, nor did I say that. I said you don't reach down over a higher graded player to grab a lower graded player; it doesn't matter the position. It doesn't matter what any of us think when we're on the clock. The professionals are the ones getting paid to scout and pick. If we're all being honest, we think they're are better options available all the time. Hell, plenty of people thought there were better players than T-mac last year. I mean, sometimes it's still a debate over players' careers. I mean, sure the busts are obviously wrong, but sometimes there is no right and wrong, it's just a matter of putting puzzle pieces together and making it work.

What I am saying is that receivers will be on our big board, regardless. Big boards are obviously going to include players at positions of need, but it would be tantamount to sacrilege to reach down over a higher graded player to grab a lower graded player simply because you perceive that the lower graded player is a bigger need.

I mean, it's possible, but does Canales (and Dan and Brandt) really feel like investing a first in a guy that will likely ride the bench this season? I don't see him, or any of them really, taking any starter's job on the O-line.