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!

     

Can we take a moment and enjoy what having a competent GM looks like


TheBigKat
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Competent? this guy was ready to give up a first for Matt Stafford, and i dont think you needed to give a up second for Darnold when nobody else wanted him. We are following in to the line of trying to convince ourselves that this is gonna be good and there is no indication it will and the Hurney haters are gonna back it anything this guy does. We are still in wait and see mode and im not moving off that. I dont think he will, but Darnold could very well end up being worse than teddy and it wont matter what you put around him.

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say it's still a while before we'll know that for certain, but I've been mostly good with what I've seen so far.

Biggest potential issue to this point has been how many guys we've signed that have injury concerns.

Every NFL player carries injury concerns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say it's still a while before we'll know that for certain, but I've been mostly good with what I've seen so far.

Biggest potential issue to this point has been how many guys we've signed that have injury concerns.

It could be that the only players willing to sign with a team as bad as the Panthers are guys with injury issues. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, CPF4LIFE said:

 I dont think he will, but Darnold could very well end up being worse than teddy and it wont matter what you put around him.

There's a deep, secret part of me that hopes this is exactly what happens so that we can try to draft a QB next year.  I'm not proud of it.  😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely premature to be hailing praises over the Darnold trade. We could look back at the whole thing as a disaster, particularly if, say, Fields is there at 8 and he becomes a pro bowl caliber qb. Meanwhile Darnold statistically has been worse than Bridgewater. I know we all hope better weapons and coaching will make him look more competent but let's say he turns into at best, a comp for Teddy. We pick up his 5th year option to pay him nearly $20 million in 2022 and are in the same position we're in this year with Teddy: stuck with an overpaid qb that won't take us anywhere with a contract that is tough to move, and meanwhile we give up what could be a high 2nd round pick if he really does flame out.

Listen, I'm not saying that's going to happen and god willing I desperately hope it doesn't. But at minimum I'm acknowleging it's very much possible. And thus it's way too soon for this kind of thread.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BrianS said:

There's a deep, secret part of me that hopes this is exactly what happens so that we can try to draft a QB next year.  I'm not proud of it.  😞

I'm going to root for my team to win this season. I think it will make it more fun. To each their own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, woahfraze said:

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

Because a) we’ll need time to evaluate if Darnold can truly be our answer at QB; and b) if he isn’t and flames out like Bridgewater, we’ll need a competent backup just in case we take a swing at a franchise QB in 2022 (Howell). And if we trade him, his cap hit is not cost prohibitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

All this said, I do think it's valid to take a moment and be happy that we're not being run by Marty Hurney anymore.

This 1000% I can't wait until the draft due to how much different the last one was and this could turn into something beautiful. The defense could be nasty, and depending on the line the offense can get some points. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Prowler2k18 said:

Because a) we’ll need time to evaluate if Darnold can truly be our answer at QB; and b) if he isn’t and flames out like Bridgewater, we’ll need a competent backup just in case we take a swing at a franchise QB in 2022 (Howell). And if we trade him, his cap hit is not cost prohibitive.

"A" makes a bit of sense.  But if he's shown enough after Year 1 that you feel he could be the real deal even if you're not 100% sure, you can resign him.  So I don't understand why you wouldn't see what you have in him after this coming year before making that decision.

 "B" makes no sense.  If he flames out, he's not a competent backup.  And even if you want to argue that he's serviceable as a backup, $19MM is way too much to be paying a backup QB.  His cap hit absolutely would be prohibitive to trade because all of that amount is guaranteed, but that's a moot point.  Because if he flames out, no one is trading for him period even if his salary wasn't so high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woahfraze said:

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

I think the EXPECTATION to pick up the 5th year was floated out there by the media, but I haven't seen it made official, would be in the team's best interest to wait until the deadline May 3rd which is the Monday after the draft. 

This way if we draft a QB we can forgo his option, and if we don't we still have the option to not commit to it. I personally wouldn't commit either way because he's not getting market value money, and if he's gone in FA we sign or look to the draft. I'd rather keep that QB money low until we draft a guy, and just build the best total roster. (See SF / MIA, as recent examples of this) we can be bad until we're in position to get ''OUR" guy. Doesn't matter how much you want to win if you don't have the pieces, we had #3 locked up, we could have rested starters Weeks 16 & 17 -- the team did this to themselves. 

I understand the morale, but we saw PHI secure #6 Week 17 pulling Hurts. We see examples every year, and we also see it not work out so no matter what you do there's opportunity to fail. A lot of it is just getting lucky, see JAX as NYJ fell into enough wins to lose the #1 overall pick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, davos said:

Honestly, if the 2nd rounder was a 3rd, maybe there would’ve been a different reaction.

IMO one second rounder in the grand of scheme of things isn’t that crazy. And one sixth when we had three this year and that future 4th is indeed peanuts. I think we slightly overpaid but the QB market is definitely hiking their going rates.

Are you really that worried about a 2nd versus 3rd round draft pick next year?  Some of yall are WAYYYYYY too attached to draft picks.

  • Pie 3
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

    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
    • Won’t stop until people stop buying overpriced poo.
×
×
  • Create New...