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!

     

Source: Panthers Open to Drafting Quarterback With No. 8 Pick


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Does Fields unseat Darnold most or all of next season, yes or no?   Simple answer.

Personally, I am against drafting a quarterback. Because  it will feel just like the Jets. As soon as Sam plays like poo, the fans will be screaming for the rookie. But I would pull a Kansas City and sit Justin all next season IFFF we were to draft him. But I am not for us drafting a QB. 

 

Answer: no 

Edited by CarolinaLivin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, t96 said:

We need to figure out QB long term. Darnold has a small chance to be that guy, but very unlikely. A Fields or Lance at 8 has a better chance to be that guy. Added together our odds of finding that long term QB increase. I don't know why anyone would have any issues with this. Plus if we start Darnold this year and he's solid and then the rookie is ready at some point we can get our assets back for Darnold in another trade. If we like one of the top 4 QBs at 8 and he's there then that'll be a great pick. If not, then we're good looking at OT/CB/etc.

I agree. Get a fresh guy in here. Not a guy who has been abused by his former team and likely will not work out. 
Like Bridgewater Darnold has one season to prove he can be the guy. 
I wish the dude luck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Panthero said:

Exactly. 

IMO, the Darnold trade was all about reading the tea leaves and seeing that #8 was likely too low to land a QB we like and the trade market to get in position to do so was too rich for our taste. I definitely don't think it takes us out of play on one of those QBs if they happen to be there at #8.

We're probably setting ourselves up to try the same approach the Seahawks did. They signed Matt Flynn in free agency after he showed out in GB in a couple of games then hedged that bet by drafting Russell Wilson in the 3rd. The rest is history. Wilson came in and won the job from day one and Matt Flynn pretty much disappeared as a footnote in NFL history. If things don't work out at #8, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see us draft a guy like Kellen Mond or Davis Mills later in the draft.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CarolinaLivin said:

Personally, I am against drafting a quarterback. Because  it will feel just like the Jets. As soon as Sam plays like poo, the fans will be screaming for the rookie. But I would pull a Kansas City and sit Justin all next season IFFF we were to draft him. But I am not for us drafting a QB. 

 

Answer: no 

Ok, so you don't have a dog in the QB preference fight, you just don't want a QB at all.  Fair enough. 

I was merely pointing out that if we did draft Fields he's likely to sit anyhow (as you even stated) and one of the biggest knocks on Lance--he has to sit a year.  I could go on from there, but I'll leave it with that.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s time for the Panthers to get the Left Tackle position taken care of and the 2021 NFL Draft presents the opportunity to do just that.
 
We may have our choice of offensive tackles, Penei Sewell |Oregon or Rashawn Slater | Northwestern.
 
Plus,it my be to our advantage to trade back in the draft and select the fast rising O.T.Christian Darrisaw | Virginia Tech.
 
I don’t think the right quarterback will drop to the Panthers in the first round, but despite the Darnold trade, it’s still a possibility to take one here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean yeah. Did we really think that next year’s second plus a couple late picks was the absolute cure for our QB position? If a talent falls you take him. If he and Darnold look good, trade one next year for a ransom. It’s too important of a position to simply roll the dice on QB who has struggled and assume we are good.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

So because they are not with their original team from 5-12 years ago, we should not take a QB if one is available?  You may want to contact the GMs for the Jags, Jets and 49ers and tell them not to bother.

You told me that it was "objectively" untrue that QBs are a 50/50 proposition at best. That's 22 QBs. At best, you can say Stafford, Bradford, Newton, Luck, Goff, and maybe Wentz weren't busts with the teams that drafted them. Bradford and Wentz are stretches, and the Rams have already jettisoned Goff in search of an upgrade. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Ok, so you don't have a dog in the QB preference fight, you just don't want a QB at all.  Fair enough. 

I was merely pointing out that if we did draft Fields he's likely to sit anyhow (as you even stated) and one of the biggest knocks on Lance--he has to sit a year.  I could go on from there, but I'll leave it with that.

I will say I wanted a QB up until we traded for one. I think the team had a love/hate with every QB option we had in the sense of loving the QB, but hating how we would have to go about getting him. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I mean yeah. Did we really think that next year’s second plus a couple late picks was the absolute cure for our QB position? If a talent falls you take him. If he and Darnold look good, trade one next year for a ransom. It’s too important of a position to simply roll the dice on QB who has struggled and assume we are good.

Bingo!  I don't understand why this is so hard for people to grasp?  QB is the MOST crucial position in football.  By having two first round QBs, here are the scenarios moving forward: both work out, only one works out or neither work out.  Right there you gave your organization 2-out-of-3 chances to succeed.  This shouldn't even be a discussion.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
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

    • With the exception of knowing our obvious needs and who we were talking to along the way, my question is this:  How did so many people start on this Jalon Walker frenzy?  I think this--everyone wants to have a voice, make a prediction.  Now with social media and 24 hour tv, networks, etc.  it is more like a middle school grapevine than it is a process where people actually dig for real evidence and reasons.  Speculative journalism is lazy, and since there are now 2,348.356 podcasters with basement studios blasting nonsense into our phones all day, I think they just cut and paste ideas.  Yes, coaches lie and mislead, but I don't think Morgan or Canales did.  You are only as reliable as your sources.  Was Morgan more deliberate this year?  I think he heard the gossip and decided to downplay WR.  He said, (paraphrasing) "We like our QB room.  We will probably add to it at some point."  Not a lie, but definitely downplaying things. I was convinced that we needed a blazer to keep safeties honest, but to be honest, I am not sure that we have the QB with the arm to keep safeties honest.  We have Coker who is 6'1", Theilen is 6'2", and Legette is 6'3" and now TMac is 6'4"+.  It seems size has more value than blazing deep speed.  If I had known they thought that, I might have gone with TMac all along--I thought he was not a good fit.  And if you look at the Panther guide and consider the talent they met with in the first round, there was only one offensive player--TMac. There was another quote that Morgan made that might have been a bit revealing or at least directive. (Paraphrasing) "We want players that were productive in college."  Well, TMac was very productive. In 2023 and in 2024, he averaged 108.8 yards per game.   He is also a great artist.  Drew this portrait of Bryce Young from memory: Many people spent 3 months absolutely confident that Jalon Walker would play edge here. We had a need at edge, but with Clowney, Wonnum, and Jones, were we OK if we drafted a second round Edge? Was Walker the answer?  Unlike Hunter, he is a versatile player who could be awesome in the right system, but if used as a pure edge, he is not a top 10 player.  I was convinced that we would sign Jalon and as much as I like the kid, I could not feel good about the pick.  Mykel Williams scared me.  Both might be great players, but I could not see it.  So was Scourton productive? He was as a Jr when he was standing.  When asked to be other things, he lost his edge (pun intended). In essence, I think we got the best pure edge when you take away the other things he was supposed to do.  Walker's productivity was based on his versatility--something he would lose as a pure edge--so we would not really be meeting needs at edge.  Scourton, on the other hand, is better when not asked to be versatile.  Princely had 10.5 sacks in the SEC.  It simply makes sense.
    • I think they will too. Renfrow will use this opportunity to get in shape and get paid for it. After he's cut he will probably get picked up by someone after preseason.
×
×
  • Create New...