Just remember this is a multi step process

[TLGPanthersFan]

If we don't draft a QB I am done with this team for the foreseeable future. I said at the beginning of the season to myself this will be the only season I hope we lose so we can get a top 5 pick and draft a QB. But I will not support a team that thinks Teddy is the future. I am fine not watching this team for years if that is what it takes. 

I just really do not support the direction this team is going and I am disliking it more and more. Not drafting a QB will be a nail in the coffin in my support. I can live without football.

[Toomers]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

For the record, I actually think he's partially right about the Teddy decision. I think his familiarity with Brady's system played a HUGE role in his signing. I just think that was a really short sighted decision.

I’m sure it was. But what veteran QB couldn’t learn that offense in no time at a much cheaper price? It doesn’t seem as if TB knows this offense any better than any other choice. Looks more like he’s afraid to take advantage of any of the downfield options the offense provides. Like he has his entire career. 

[thefuzz]

We could have achieved the same result with Kyle Allen under center, while conserving our comp picks and a TON of cap space. 

[Stumpy]

1 hour ago, BrianS said:

Teddy makes complete sense.  We needed a guy who knew the system and could teach it.  That's Teddy. 

This is the talking point that I still don't understand.

Joe Brady has never been a coordinator before. He had never even called plays before this season. Its not like he has an established system that he's been executing for years.

Outside of a few specific plays he stole from past employers its a completely new system. I'm sure there are some overall philosophical ideas Brady has for his offense. But, its not a fully fledged out system with intracacies so deep only a veteran with experience in it could run.

If anything, science has shown unequivocably that younger people learn quicker than older people. If you really want to bring in a qb to help the team learn an entirely new system, you'd be better off with a rookie or young qb like Allen or Grier.

[Khyber53]

1 hour ago, thefuzz said:

We could have achieved the same result with Kyle Allen under center, while conserving our comp picks and a TON of cap space. 

The fans would have burned Tepper's house if we'd have trotted out Kyle Allen as our starting QB. 

This process is going to take time. This isn't Tampa trying to buy a championship on a one year run. We may be competitive next year, we might not. Third year, that's when it should all work out if we're on schedule or if it is going to happen at all. Building a lasting dynasty team is a whole lot harder in real life than it is in Madden or a Fantasy Football Keeper League. 

 

[thefuzz]

17 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

The fans would have burned Tepper's house if we'd have trotted out Kyle Allen as our starting QB. 

This process is going to take time. This isn't Tampa trying to buy a championship on a one year run. We may be competitive next year, we might not. Third year, that's when it should all work out if we're on schedule or if it is going to happen at all. Building a lasting dynasty team is a whole lot harder in real life than it is in Madden or a Fantasy Football Keeper League. 

 

Why would you say that?

Trotting out Allen or Grier, I preferred Grier if it would hasten Hurney's exit, and saving a poo ton of cap space while almost guaranteeing you a top 4 draft pick would have been the prudent thing to do.  We had tanked, and were ready for the next step, instead, we did half measures and still my fail our way to the exact same spot.

 

[Snake]

2 hours ago, thefuzz said:

We could have achieved the same result with Kyle Allen under center, while conserving our comp picks and a TON of cap space. 

No argument there. Teddy Two gloves has been a major bust. 

 

[Snake]

1 hour ago, Stumpy said:

This is the talking point that I still don't understand.

Joe Brady has never been a coordinator before. He had never even called plays before this season. Its not like he has an established system that he's been executing for years.

Outside of a few specific plays he stole from past employers its a completely new system. I'm sure there are some overall philosophical ideas Brady has for his offense. But, its not a fully fledged out system with intracacies so deep only a veteran with experience in it could run.

If anything, science has shown unequivocably that younger people learn quicker than older people. If you really want to bring in a qb to help the team learn an entirely new system, you'd be better off with a rookie or young qb like Allen or Grier.

He's being talked about for head coaching jobs. That's not what you expect from a OC the league thinks can manage an entire team. 

[BrianS]

2 hours ago, Toomers said:

I’m sure it was. But what veteran QB couldn’t learn that offense in no time at a much cheaper price?

What a great question!

Here are the FA's last year:

Hindsight doesn't count here.  At the time, Bridgewater seemed like the one with the most potential.   There is no way we were bringing in 38 year old Rivers or 43 year old Brady for a CLEAR rebuild.  Keep in mind, your team needs to be attractive.  Clear rebuild isn't attractive to many players.

Case Keenum?  Signed immediately for the Browns.  We had no chance.

Chase Daniel?  I'm not sure what the question is where "Chase Daniel" is the answer.

Andy Dalton?  He wasn't even available until after the draft!

Colt McCoy?  Same as Chase Daniel.

Mariota?  Signed immediately with the Raiders, we had no shot.  Shame, I think Mariota might have been ok. 

Driskel?  All kinds of terrible.

This was a crap year for FA QB's.  I mean, any time you're looking at a FA QB, they are going to be flawed.  If a guy has any sort of long term starting potential, he's going to be retained by his club or traded for something of value.  Then you have to find one you think fits your system and situation and possibly his flaws can be covered.

Yea, maybe we paid a premium to bring in a QB who knew the system we were going to implement with a clear rebuild on the table.  Maybe not.  How many of the guys making less are actually starting?

It was a crap sandwich of a situation that we tried to make the best of.

[Sgt Schultz]

Why would he say that, you ask? 

Some noticeable percentage of this board would be insisting that we would be in playoff contention if we had somebody better than Allen or Grier, despite an OL that struggles to be mediocre and a defense that is still a couple of players away from being able to protect any lead

Some would say the coaching staff were morons for going into the season with Allen and Grier, given what we saw last year.  They would also be saying we should have signed somebody other than Allen or Grier.....heck, that Bridgewater guy was available.

Some would say during the week that they are all on board with tanking, then complain on game days and Mondays after each loss. 

Some would say we should have extended Cam

Some would say we should have addressed our two or three needs from last year and made another run at the playoffs, just like we had done every year since 2017

When Cam was released, some would have said if we didn't sign or draft a QB last offseason, that they were done watching this horrible team that has ruined their life

Some would have said several or all of these things

 

[Sgt Schultz]

2 minutes ago, BrianS said:

What a great question!

Here are the FA's last year:

Hindsight doesn't count here.  At the time, Bridgewater seemed like the one with the most potential.   There is no way we were bringing in 38 year old Rivers or 43 year old Brady for a CLEAR rebuild.  Keep in mind, your team needs to be attractive.  Clear rebuild isn't attractive to many players.

Case Keenum?  Signed immediately for the Browns.  We had no chance.

Chase Daniel?  I'm not sure what the question is where "Chase Daniel" is the answer.

Andy Dalton?  He wasn't even available until after the draft!

Colt McCoy?  Same as Chase Daniel.

Mariota?  Signed immediately with the Raiders, we had no shot.  Shame, I think Mariota might have been ok. 

Driskel?  All kinds of terrible.

This was a crap year for FA QB's.  I mean, any time you're looking at a FA QB, they are going to be flawed.  If a guy has any sort of long term starting potential, he's going to be retained by his club or traded for something of value.  Then you have to find one you think fits your system and situation and possibly his flaws can be covered.

Yea, maybe we paid a premium to bring in a QB who knew the system we were going to implement with a clear rebuild on the table.  Maybe not.  How many of the guys making less are actually starting?

It was a crap sandwich of a situation that we tried to make the best of.

Looking at the list, only Bridgewater, Mariota, and Winston were probably ever in play.  I thought Mariota could have been the choice, because I didn't think we were going to be in line with what TB would be asking. 

Winston had the distinct advantage of already knowing how to complete passes to Panthers in his career, but he wasn't going anywhere as a starter.

Mariota probably would not have provided any more wins or a path to the future, but I suspected he might be cheap.  As you said, the Raiders jumped on that opportunity.

The only other thing that catches my eye on that list is that Daniel and McCoy are both 33......d*#n am I getting old!

[Byrdman4real]

9 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

Why would he say that, you ask? 

Some noticeable percentage of this board would be insisting that we would be in playoff contention if we had somebody better than Allen or Grier, despite an OL that struggles to be mediocre and a defense that is still a couple of players away from being able to protect any lead

Some would say the coaching staff were morons for going into the season with Allen and Grier, given what we saw last year.  They would also be saying we should have signed somebody other than Allen or Grier.....heck, that Bridgewater guy was available.

Some would say during the week that they are all on board with tanking, then complain on game days and Mondays after each loss. 

Some would say we should have extended Cam

Some would say we should have addressed our two or three needs from last year and made another run at the playoffs, just like we had done every year since 2017

When Cam was released, some would have said if we didn't sign or draft a QB last offseason, that they were done watching this horrible team that has ruined their life

Some would have said several or all of these things

 

The answer was to make Cam play under his last year of his contract and drafting his replacement. If he refused to play, cut him and let the backup take over. It was no need to bring Bridgewater in, and especially for 60 million.

This way other players could have been resigned 

[thefuzz]

Just now, Byrdman4real said:

The answer was to make Cam play under his last year of his contract and drafting his replacement. If he refused to play, cut him and let the backup take over. It was no need to bring Bridgewater in, and especially for 60 million 

Cutting Cam was the correct move, but they stopped the rebuild in it's tracks right then.

Signing Teddy, Shaq, and keeping KK were the braindead moves that will delay the process.

But hey, we gotta act like we are trying to win 5 games right?  Right?

 

[Sgt Schultz]

4 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Cutting Cam was the correct move, but they stopped the rebuild in it's tracks right then.

Signing Teddy, Shaq, and keeping KK were the braindead moves that will delay the process.

But hey, we gotta act like we are trying to win 5 games right?  Right?

 

You may see that, but from my observations on this board, most fans (including ours) are not patient enough to suffer through a rebuild without questioning either 1) not keeping Cam, or 2) once he was released, not signing somebody....anybody.

Personally, I am not bothered by TB's contract.  I am bothered by the lack of performance.  But $20M was just Cam's amount for three years.  Truth is, had Cam had two years to go on his contract at $20M/year rather than one, we may not be having any of this conversation.  We'd probably be moving on the same plan just with #1 seeing the transition instead of #5.