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!

     

Darnold part of the draft day strategy


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

I know.. ppl playing checkers some playing chess and so on and so on..

I just think ppl don’t realize how thing really didn’t go our way this offseason and this is a solid move despite those circumstances..

I honestly think this board suffers from Post-Traumatic-Hurney Syndrome.  Rational moves like this really screws with how they have been wired all these many years.  It does not compute with them.   Minds are literally fried.  Going back to the Watson asking price several weeks ago, that on the other hand, the treasure trove we would have shipped to Houston somehow made sense!  We are so used to getting royally screwed over in our trades and mind-numbing bloated contracts being thrown around that the Darnold trade is bad because, I assume, they can't wrap their head's around it.

It's a reclamation project on a cheap (for a QB) rookie deal that we can be out form under in 24 months (or earlier) if Darnold doesn't work out.  We lost a end-of-round pick in the 6th (comp pick) and a 4th of little consequence.  The way I look at it is we lost a 2nd if Darnold is beyond fixing.  I mean Darnold has to be more productive than Greg Little--our 2nd rounder of 2019 that currently warms the bench.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

The difference is that one is an elite QB and the other is one of the worst starting QB's in the NFL. 

I wouldn't normally put a high value on a 2nd rounder bit we also have a bottom 5 roster in the NFL, so those picks matter. That is unless Rhule and Fitterer are idiots and then I guess this is all for naught anyway. 

Watson's team made waves one year despite the talent on their roster.  The Texans had a much superior roster to the Jets this entire time.   Look, I'm no Darnold fanboy, but I will acknowledge the dude had crap coaching, crap talent and crap culture around him (otherwise known as the New York Jets organization) compared to most of the rest of the League.  He very well may be damaged goods, but for essentially a 2nd round pick, I think it's a smart gamble considering he was considered arguably the best QB in his draft class at the time.  Lastly, it sealed the fact Teddy is out the door.

Edited by 45catfan
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, top dawg said:

We're not going to pass up on a QB that falls to us if we like him as a franchise QB. That's not going to happen. Darnold doesn't change that. 

If they thought Lance or Fields was a franchise QB they would’ve moved up to 3 to take them.

Now if they fall to 8 may they roll the dice? Who knows. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

If they thought Lance or Fields was a franchise QB they would’ve moved up to 3 to take them.

Now if they fall to 8 may they roll the dice? Who knows. 

I do. You draft the guy, period.  You have an ace of spades in your back pocket. 

a) Competition for Darnold--he can't rest on his laurels.  Getting pushed by Walker or Grier?  L-O-L!!!!!

b) If Darnold doesn't work out, we are not back in the same spot by already drafting his replacement.

c) If Darold doesn't work out, it gives the rookie a year to learn the NFL and our scheme.

d) If Brady works magic with Daronld, we have a HUGE bargaining chip with a 1st round QB in trade.

e) We could be a cherry scenario of having a starting level QB and a starting-caliber backup.

 

 

Edited by 45catfan
Link to post
Share on other sites

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers.

Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing? 🙄

  • Pie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers.

Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing? 🙄

I would go the Patriot rout and groom qb's to trade for a premium.

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, *FreeFua* said:

If they thought Lance or Fields was a franchise QB they would’ve moved up to 3 to take them.

Now if they fall to 8 may they roll the dice? Who knows. 

Well, you're probably right. But, it's a cost-value analysis. Cognizant of the fact that there's still a high bust rate, regardless of best intentions, maybe they just didn't feel the need to risk those extra picks. A third and two extra firsts is a lot if you're wrong. You essentially kill your tank your next three seasons, so there's really no room for error.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers.

Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing? 🙄

Because they had a proven, HoF, still playing at an elite level QB? Darnold is a project and far from a sure thing, doubling up just increases our chances of having our next franchise QB especially if a talent like Fields falls to us. It’s really not the same thing at all... The Packers were just in the NFC championship game and still have a window to win it all. We are rebuilding so finding a young QB is possibly the most important part of this rebuild.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Soul Rebel said:

If a QB that New England likes is available at 8, any chance that they trade JC Jackson + 15 to move up to 8? We would still get a franchise-caliber starting LT at 15 (Darrisaw/Vera-Tucker) and a stud CB1 that is only 25 years old. 

We would then be able to add another game changing player at 39 and already have our LT and CB1 of the future locked in. 

0% chance of this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers.

Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing? 🙄

We have an Aaron Rodgers?! Damn, that future 2nd round pick ain’t looking so steep anymore after all!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers.

Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing? 🙄

Yup and Fields/Lance are much better prospects than Love.  You can never have too many good options at QB and besides, Sam Darnold is no Aaron Rogers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jfra78 said:

We are not taking a QB at 8.  It's over, stop with the dreaming.  It's more likely we use 8 on the best LT or trade back if they can get a good haul.  If a QB is sitting there they will easily get a 1st and 2nd,  making losing next years 2nd an after thought.

I think we would take Fields if he's there, and maybe even take Lance if he's there. I don't think we would take Mac Jones though if he was the best qb available at that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

We've given the Packers a load of sh-t for taking Jordan Love when they could have taken someone to help Aaron Rodgers.

Now we're suggesting the Panthers do the same thing? 🙄

SMH...Did he really just compared Rodgers to Darnold...???

We have serious mental health issues going on here.

 

tumblr_n9k5l5CLpi1rdutw3o1_400.gif

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...