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!

     

For Zach Wilson fans...


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

And yet the general consensus among actual professor scouts is that Wilson is the better quarterback.

Now with that said, if your perception is that I'm a big Wilson fan, you're wrong. I like his skill set a lot, but as mentioned I have major concerns about his durability.

To get either fields or Wilson likely requires a trade up, and I'm not in favor of that in either case.

Mac Jones is a better QB than Fields right now.  There were plenty of better QBs than Cam Newton in his draft too. 

Consensus among the scouts is Fields has more talent and the higher ceiling. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

As to Wilson, question marks about whether he'll be durable enough at the NFL level scare me...a lot.

You say this all the time . . . but where is it coming from?  Wilson has never missed a game.

Wilson is 6-3, 210, BMI of 26.2.  For comparitive purposes, Eli Manning was 6-5, 220, BMI of 26.1 and Alex Smith was 6-4, 217, BMI of 26.4.  Neither of those guys had "durability issues".

I don't get it man.  He's not yet a college senior, yes, he could stand to put on a few pounds.  What college prospect do you NOT say that about?  Wilson may or may not succeed in the NFL, but it won't be due to durability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CRA said:

Mac Jones is a better QB than Fields right now.  There were plenty of better QBs than Cam Newton in his draft too. 

Mac Jones couldn't beat out Jalen Hurts or Tua . . . but is somehow better than Fields?

The guy is .500 in games decided by less than two scores.  He lost one last year, badly, to Auburn.  He should have lost this year to Florida, but got bailed out by the Florida receivers.

The guy just hasn't shown anything but good touch.  That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BrianS said:

You say this all the time . . . but where is it coming from?  Wilson has never missed a game.

Wilson is 6-3, 210, BMI of 26.2.  For comparitive purposes, Eli Manning was 6-5, 220, BMI of 26.1 and Alex Smith was 6-4, 217, BMI of 26.4.  Neither of those guys had "durability issues".

I don't get it man.  He's not yet a college senior, yes, he could stand to put on a few pounds.  What college prospect do you NOT say that about?  Wilson may or may not succeed in the NFL, but it won't be due to durability.

Wilson already has had surgery on this throwing shoulder.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BrianS said:

Mac Jones couldn't beat out Jalen Hurts or Tua . . . but is somehow better than Fields?

The guy is .500 in games decided by less than two scores.  He lost one last year, badly, to Auburn.  He should have lost this year to Florida, but got bailed out by the Florida receivers.

The guy just hasn't shown anything but good touch.  That's it.

two different things.  Think you are missing my point or I stated it poorly.  

Hurts and Tua were both significantly more talented than Mac Jones.   Which made them better players.  Was Mac Jones technically a more sound QB than Hurts at Bama? Probably.  

I mean you could be the most fundamentally sound LB in college football.  But if you ain't got the talent to go with it.  You are selling insurance. 

I wasn't advocating Mac Jones as better than Fields.  I think he technically plays the position traditionally better at this stage.    It isn't actually praise of Mac.  Just like I wasn't praising the dudes drafted after Cam Newton that were better QBs at the time.  Cam was the best player and more talented.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, CRA said:

Mac Jones is a better QB than Fields right now.  There were plenty of better QBs than Cam Newton in his draft too. 

Consensus among the scouts is Fields has more talent and the higher ceiling. 

The most physically talented quarterback at the college level isn't always the best quarterback at the pro level.

Look at Vince Young.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

And yet the general consensus among actual professor scouts is that Wilson is the better quarterback.

Now with that said, if your perception is that I'm a big Wilson fan, you're wrong. I like his skill set a lot, but as mentioned I have major concerns about his durability.

To get either fields or Wilson likely requires a trade up, and I'm not in favor of that in either case.

You don't know what the consensus is among professional scouts. You know what media analysts are saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The most physically talented quarterback at the college level isn't always the best quarterback at the pro level.

Look at Vince Young.

No, but if I am a NFL team and I got to set it as my rule?....I'd rather gamble on the freak talent standing out at a major college program over the more technically sound player at some small time school.     

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The most physically talented quarterback at the college level isn't always the best quarterback at the pro level.

Look at Vince Young.

and there are also a lot of really "smart" productive QBs at the college level that don't make it in the pros either.

Absolute statements either way are dumb.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, CRA said:

No, but if I am a NFL team and I got to set it as my rule?....I'd rather gamble on the freak talent standing out at a major college program over the more technically sound player at some small time school.     

And that's how you wind up choosing a guy like Jeff George over someone like Kurt Warner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

And that's how you wind up choosing a guy like Jeff George over someone like Kurt Warner.

Well, you can find an example that runs counter to literally everything. 

as a I general rule, as a NFL team, I still gamble on the standout talent that thrives vs elite college programs over more technically sound players at small schools.   Overall, that works out better for you in the long run.  


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It all sounds great. The only unknowns are injuries and how they will need to be addressed. Horn has a history as does the newly added Jaelen Phillips and Cooker has yet to play an entire season as well. And then there are the Ikey's - totally unexpecteded injuries that put a major wrench in your plans. I do think its a great plan though.
    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
×
×
  • Create New...