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!

     

Colin Cowherd: Matt Kalil and Sam Darnold

DaveThePanther2008

By DaveThePanther2008,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

raleigh-panther Grand Master

raleigh-panther

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

He's on the roster now so hopefully he works out. If he doesn't work out I just hope that he bombs HARD. We don't need 5 or 6 wins again. Go big or go home. Be the answer or be our Clausen 2.0. Anything in between would just plain suck.

Yep, since 1995, I’ve seen a lot of Clausens

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Snake said:

Its a very unique situation so we might have a better shot at unscrewing him.

It is definitely unique.  He certainly showed much less than Tannehill overall, but he had much less time to do so before Gase got to him, too.  I'm cautiously optimistic about him, and like the flexibility he gives to the team this draft.  I was very worried we were going to reach for a QB.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

He's on the roster now so hopefully he works out. If he doesn't work out I just hope that he bombs HARD. We don't need 5 or 6 wins again. Go big or go home. Be the answer or be our Clausen 2.0. Anything in between would just plain suck.

I think there's a pretty good chance it is one or the other, honestly.  When someone has the raw talent he has, it seems like they are most likely to either be a great starter or a total bust.  Last year Darnold was unquestionably in the later category, but the situation with Gase etc makes all this hard to read.

Edited by mav1234
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

I think there's a pretty good chance it is one or the other, honestly.  When someone has the raw talent he has, it seems like they are most likely to either be a great starter or a total bust.  Last year Darnold was unquestionably in the later category, but the situation with Gase etc makes all this hard to read.

I agree. Darnold has a lot more upside potential than Teddy but just as importantly IMO is that he has far more massive bust potential too. You know what you're getting with Teddy. Straight up mediocrity. Darnold is far more boom or bust which is a good thing in my mind. Better chance to be the answer and also a better chance to land us a premium draft pick of he's not. Win/win in my book.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, mav1234 said:

When you watch his highlights, Darnold makes some special plays.

The problem is that the plays he makes between the highlights are often real problematic.  Hopefully good coaching can help clean that up. We saw how Gase took Tannehill, who appeared to make good and safe decisions with the ball (~2% of his throws as INTs, which is find for a young player), to a terrible decision maker (>3% as INTs over his 2 years with gase).  Can Darnold recover how Tannehill did?  Time will tell...

Some of those highlights he moves well within the pocket and makes plays.  Considering the coaching this is a promising virtue.  If we can protect him better and with the weapons we have. He should do better.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I agree. Darnold has a lot more upside potential than Teddy but just as importantly IMO is that he has far more massive bust potential too. You know what you're getting with Teddy. Straight up mediocrity. Darnold is far more boom or bust which is a good thing in my mind. Better chance to be the answer and also a better chance to land us a premium draft pick of he's not. Win/win in my book.

This is true, I am not factoring in his awfulness enough as a positive attribute for getting us a shot at another top 10 draft pick.

However, the counter to that being, what if it also exposes how poorly our staff is at evaluating QB talent? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1usctrojan Proficient

1usctrojan

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, therealmjl said:

Please don’t use that turnstile in the same sentence as Sam Darnold ever again. 

don’t you put that evil on us 

I get that Ryan was not the same Ryan that you drafted, but wasn’t he a good player for you most of his career?  A good teammate and support your community?
 

He did something right, marrying a Song Girl, lol.  Seriously, did he do something really bad to the fans and franchise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NanuqoftheNorth Grand Master

NanuqoftheNorth

Posted
Posted

Here is Archie Manning talking about Darnold's situation w/the Jets last October (during a broader conversation about Trevor Lawrence). 

Some may recall that Archie was as a pretty good NFL QB on some really bad Saint's teams.  He also raised two sons that went on to win several Super Bowls.  So, I'm gonna have to give his opinion a little more weight than the average sport pundit.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Snake Grand Master

Snake

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, mav1234 said:

It is definitely unique.  He certainly showed much less than Tannehill overall, but he had much less time to do so before Gase got to him, too.  I'm cautiously optimistic about him, and like the flexibility he gives to the team this draft.  I was very worried we were going to reach for a QB.

With everything being said I think he's a better QB than Bridgewater right now. Probably doesn't know the system as well though.

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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...