Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Fournette in the first? What bothers me


CRA

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Nails said:

That and Barnett's consistency and upside at only 20 are why Barnett is 1a to my Fournette 1b.  Nothing against the safeties other than I prefer DE by a mile as well.

I'd love for a great DE to be there for us. That being said, I wasn't that impressed by Barnett. I've watched every snap of his from a collection of 2016 games. Thanks to this awesome site https://draftbreakdown.com/players/derek-barnett/

To me he was not good at sealing the edge in run D. I also thought he seemed to be 1 dimensional in skill set. Seems like he has an incredibly quick first step and relies on his speed to run around tackles and seems to take the longest route to the QB(granted he's so good at that it has worked well in college). Youll also notice him bite on playaction and seems to have a hard time diagnosing plays consistently. 

If his talent can be groomed and his skill set further developed to make him a good pro, then I'd be all for him. Just seems I can't be conviced of that as much as I'm convinced Fournette's skill set will translate nicely.

This pick needs to be a home run whoever it is, because if Gettleman does what he's supposed to, we won't draft this low again for a very long time.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it stands now my money would be on either Fournette or Derek Barnett (who at 8 I don't like) being the pick.

Like previously mentioned in thread I don't think Gettleman really values the safety position. Pairing a high football IQ type safety (Adams) with a guy like Kuechly could do wonders for our secondary as a whole. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ncsportsfan1234 said:

I'm saying he needs to improve his mechanics and footwork and yes I'm saying being such a big piece of our ground attack has kept him from developing that.... he's lost a step.... it's time to have a legitimate nfl running game not based on trickery.... if we want cam to actually develope as a passer we need to take the running burden off him.

 

I don't disagree on needing to have a traditional run game and quit taking shortcuts because we have Cam...

but to me it starts on the OL....not in the backfield. 

But Cam will always be more football player than QB.  That is what makes him special.  I'm not big on this turning him into Eli Manning to milk 3-4 more years out of his career.  He is what he is....and we are wasting him thinking he is the problem when we have done so little around him to let him thrive.  

The lack of investing around him so he can thrive is just us wasting years of a mismatch the NFL had never seen....sad really 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top two running backs, based on rushing yards this year, were both rookies.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/rushing/sort/rushingYards/year/2016/seasontype/2 

One was drafted 4th, one was drafted 150th.

The first one had about 300 more yards but he had about 70 more carries.  The second one actually had a bit better ypc.

While it is true that drafting Fornette might allow us to cut Stew and therefore save a little bit of money it sure seems like we have enough needs not to be creating new ones when we don't have to.  Stewart has another year left on his contract and we could always find his replacement next year.  If you keep both on the team that is a lot of cap tied up n in the running back positon.

I definitely understand the appeal though.  Personally I think he is a better prospect then either Gurley or Elliot.  Giving Cam one of the best running backs in the league for the next 8 years definitely wouldn't be bad thing.  He is a physical runner and could take some of the short yardage duties away from cam.  I would also think we would be pretty good at pass protection

I'm guessing he will probably be a top 3 rated prospect on most team's draft board.  The only questions is how much do teams value the position.  

I think there is very good chance he is gone by the time we pick.  If he was to fall to us I could definitely understand why we picked him, I just might go in a different direction if it was my decision. I just hope we don't do anything stupid like trade up for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nails said:

Not ideal but all situations are different.  LT is a premium position, Cam was just beat to a pulp and no one anywhere did anything, our time is now (2018), and the other options, IF Oher doesn't return, are bad to downright nuclear bomb level disastrous.

You're preaching to the choir dude.   I totally agree they need line help upgrades on both ends and center (it's coming sooner than we want).  I'm saying if you're going to invest in a long term solution at premium prices do it on someone that gives you the most time in a core postion on the line at a high level.   Not on an aging vet with maybe two decent years in them at the cost of reducing your draft picks and a poo load of cap space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, panther4life said:

I'd love for a great DE to be there for us. That being said, I wasn't that impressed by Barnett. I've watched every snap of his from a collection of 2016 games. Thanks to this awesome site https://draftbreakdown.com/players/derek-barnett/

To me he was not good at sealing the edge in run D. I also thought he seemed to be 1 dimensional in skill set. Seems like he has an incredibly quick first step and relies on his speed to run around tackles and seems to take the longest route to the QB(granted he's so good at that it has worked well in college). Youll also notice him bite on playaction and seems to have a hard time diagnosing plays consistently. 

If his talent can be groomed and his skill set further developed to make him a good pro, then I'd be all for him. Just seems I can't be conviced of that as much as I'm convinced Fournette's skill set will translate nicely.

This pick needs to be a home run whoever it is, because if Gettleman does what he's supposed to, we won't draft this low again for a very long time.

 

 

 

 

Critiquing Barnett is like critiquing Scarlett Johansson because her butt isn't QUITE as big and juicy as J-Lo's.  Good grief.  The guy is an all around DE who not only set Reggie White's sack mark, but affects plays in multiple ways and can even drop into coverage.

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/811229203723063300

No perfect woman on earth and no perfect player at 8, but Barnett is a football player and good guy who will certainly grow, and would be manna from heaven for our DL rotation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Top two running backs, based on rushing yards this year, were both rookies.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/rushing/sort/rushingYards/year/2016/seasontype/2 

One was drafted 4th, one was drafted 150th.

The first one had about 300 more yards but he had about 70 more carries.  The second one actually had a bit better ypc.

While it is true that drafting Fornette might allow us to cut Stew and therefore save a little bit of money it sure seems like we have enough needs not to be creating new ones when we don't have to.  Stewart has another year left on his contract and we could always find his replacement next year.  If you keep both on the team that is a lot of cap tied up n in the running back positon.

I definitely understand the appeal though.  Personally I think he is a better prospect then either Gurley or Elliot.  Giving Cam one of the best running backs in the league for the next 8 years definitely wouldn't be bad thing.  He is a physical runner and could take some of the short yardage duties away from cam.  I would also think we would be pretty good at pass protection

I'm guessing he will probably be a top 3 rated prospect on most team's draft board.  The only questions is how much do teams value the position.  

I think there is very good chance he is gone by the time we pick.  If he was to fall to us I could definitely understand why we picked him, I just might go in a different direction if it was my decision. I just hope we don't do anything stupid like trade up for him. 

Panthers run the ball 50% of time incase people forgot

Tod Gurley was rated high on the Panther's board 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ncsportsfan1234 said:

Aside from 2015 he's never been above 20th in passing TDs yards or completion % rushing records for a quarterback aren't that impressive...

He's also never been able to pass for 4000 yards again since his rookie year.

Yards are yards. Touchdowns are touchdowns. Terrible argument.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ncsportsfan1234 said:

I don't think Dave has S that high on his board don't think there is a chance he pulls the trigger in the top 10 on a safety.

Maybe in another draft, but when those guys are getting compared to Ed reed and earl Thomas you gotta take a hard look. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, pantherclaw said:

I don't care of stats. 

I don't feel any RB is worth a top 10 pick.

That's why they pay scouts to evaluate these kids.  If he grades out as top 10 in this class then he's top 10 by their standards not ours.   Does Dave agree?  Who knows.  

I try not to get caught up in the stats myself nor do I watch countless hours of tape or do background checks on these guys so I leave it to the professionals to decide.  As a fan I just cheer on whoever they pick.  I'm as giddy as a kid on Christmas Eve just thinking about getting some new blood on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bogart said:

That's why they pay scouts to evaluate these kids.  If he grades out as top 10 in this class then he's top 10 by their standards not ours.   Does Dave agree?  Who knows.  

I try not to get caught up in the stats myself nor do I watch countless hours of tape or do background checks on these guys so I leave it to the professionals to decide.  As a fan I just cheer on whoever they pick.  I'm as giddy as a kid on Christmas Eve just thinking about getting some new blood on the team.

Like I just said in one of the other million threads regarding this kid, I wouldn't be mad, but no thanks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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. 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. The injury clouds the immediate projection. Most ACL recoveries for offensive linemen run nine to twelve months, which means World is likely unavailable for meaningful action well into his rookie season at the earliest. The combine absence removes his chance to reset the narrative physically, and teams will be making decisions almost entirely off pre-injury film and medical evaluations. The contrast between his polished pass sets and his inconsistent run blocking was already a developmental concern, and now those technique issues get deferred further while he rehabs. 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?      
    • Its never the QBs fault, so if we get a new WR and he looks bad he must be a bust
    • Based on what? Its certainly not his in game coaching prowess. 
×
×
  • Create New...