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!

     

Albert Breer also has us taking Fields, believes Tepper is pushing for it.


GoobyPls
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It makes his hire in Jacksonville very questionable IMO. Forget the migraine issues that led to his OSU retirement. The guy has a long list of NFL QB failures and you're hiring him to develop the NFL career of the most anticipated QB prospect since Andrew Luck? Okay...

yeah, I am a Trevor stan.   And I just couldn't believe they are going to screw up landing Trevor by adding Urban.   

Urban creates toxic scenarios.....then bails.  Rinse and repeat.  I think his toxic creation will emerge even quicker in the pros than college.      

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

Bringing in a guy when they knew Cam would not be the same would have made sense. Too bad they didn't. 

Brady was a late round flyer.

Favre was an established vet starting the slide to the downside of his career with a good team around him. The Packers were in a position to be able to take a young QB and let him sit and learn. Same for Montana and Young. The Colts did the same with Manning and Luck. The current Panthers are not even in the ballpark that those teams were.

Once again, Cam Newton franchise QB equaled 3 winning seasons with the current rules. It takes a lot more than a QB to be a perennial contender. A young QB needs weapons, coaching, and protection. The Panthers failed to give Cam that repeatedly. The current contending and superbowl teams had good teams built and then got their QB. The Panthers should follow the examples of those winning teams.

I can agree with this statement. Except for the fact that the comparisons your using is off. We're in a position now with a young QB with experience to draft a contingency plan, who could sit for a while to determine if Sam is going to make it. If he doesn't then we're fine with Fields. If he does, then we have a surplus and trade bait. It sets us up nicely to not be forced into a long term contract with Sam if he doesn't pan out.

 

I'm just of the mindset that there is a reason why the guys listed above have been perennial contenders. Brady, Rodgers and many guys like that always provide wins with a sub par cast. We need that under center. When we find that then we continue the build. If they feel like he's THAT GUY. If not, then draft BPA get your tackle or CB. I just think completely disocounting having that talent stashed behind darnold is a bad idea. Bc we just don't know if Darnold will turn it around here. And if we were to trade that pick to NE, and fields comes out and meets the expectation. That'll sting a whole lot more. But I can see your side of things as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Diehardpanth02 said:

I can agree with this statement. Except for the fact that the comparisons your using is off. We're in a position now with a young QB with experience to draft a contingency plan, who could sit for a while to determine if Sam is going to make it. If he doesn't then we're fine with Fields. If he does, then we have a surplus and trade bait. It sets us up nicely to not be forced into a long term contract with Sam if he doesn't pan out.

 

I'm just of the mindset that there is a reason why the guys listed above have been perennial contenders. Brady, Rodgers and many guys like that always provide wins with a sub par cast. We need that under center. When we find that then we continue the build. If they feel like he's THAT GUY. If not, then draft BPA get your tackle or CB. I just think completely disocounting having that talent stashed behind darnold is a bad idea. Bc we just don't know if Darnold will turn it around here. And if we were to trade that pick to NE, and fields comes out and meets the expectation. That'll sting a whole lot more. But I can see your side of things as well.

I get what you're saying, but Darnold is a guy they are wanting to rehab. If not and it was an attempt at a smokescreen, it was stupid to trade for him. Other teams have seen how bad Darnold was in NY. Their FOs should be aware the Panthers could still take a QB or at least planned for that if one slips to 8 in the draft.

Adding a top ten QB might add extra pressure to Darnold. It'll definitely add pressure to the staff to start the rookie instead of letting him sit. The fans will yell for the rookie to start day 1. When Darnold throws a pick, if he plays, fans will yell louder for the rookie to start. When the Panthers lose a game, the fans will yell even louder for the rookie. The media will also question when the rookie will play, even if it isn't the local media.

I hate playing what if, but since you started it...What if the rookie QB sucks. What if the rookie tackle, CB, or whatever the Panthers pass on wins rookie of the year? That'll sting a lot too.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

I get what you're saying, but Darnold is a guy they are wanting to rehab. If not and it was an attempt at a smokescreen, it was stupid to trade for him. Other teams have seen how bad Darnold was in NY.

Several teams expressed interest in trading for Darnold early. The vast majority of them weren't patient enough to wait on the Jets though.

The fact that we were makes it harder for me to buy in on the idea that we have a low opinion of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

Bringing in a guy when they knew Cam would not be the same would have made sense. Too bad they didn't. 

Brady was a late round flyer.

Favre was an established vet starting the slide to the downside of his career with a good team around him. The Packers were in a position to be able to take a young QB and let him sit and learn. Same for Montana and Young. The Colts did the same with Manning and Luck. The current Panthers are not even in the ballpark that those teams were.

Once again, Cam Newton franchise QB equaled 3 winning seasons with the current rules. It takes a lot more than a QB to be a perennial contender. A young QB needs weapons, coaching, and protection. The Panthers failed to give Cam that repeatedly. The current contending and superbowl teams had good teams built and then got their QB. The Panthers should follow the examples of those winning teams.

Coach, GM, QB

We see what Tepper thought of the coach and GM. They're gone. I wager to say that Tepper wouldn't have jettisoned prime Cam like he did those two.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Several teams expressed interest in trading for Darnold early. The vast majority of them weren't patient enough to wait on the Jets though.

The fact that we were makes it harder for me to buy in on the idea that we have a low opinion of him.

I've stated before the team could think Darnold is their guy. They might be right, they might be wrong. Only way to find out is to let him play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Coach, GM, QB

We see what Tepper thought of the coach and GM. They're gone. I wager to say that Tepper wouldn't have jettisoned prime Cam like he did those two.

 

 

Tepper also hung on to Marty and Ron a lot longer than he should have too. Especially Marty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darnold = insurance and doesn’t make us trade away too many picks for a QB or settle on whoever makes it to 8. He allows us to take the BPA. They are comfortable with him at QB this year. If someone they like happens to fall to 8 it will be interesting. If it’s one they really like we will either get a nice haul in a trade down or have a QB competition in camp.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jayboogieman said:

I've stated before the team could think Darnold is their guy. They might be right, they might be wrong. Only way to find out is to let him play.

they brought him in for a year to kick the tires.  see what is there.  we got nothing else going on.  I'm cool with that.  

this narrative we are all in on Darnold as anything more than the above, should draft around Sam being our QB, etc is what I ain't buying. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ForJimmy said:

Darnold = insurance and doesn’t make us trade away too many picks for a QB or settle on whoever makes it to 8. He allows us to take the BPA. They are comfortable with him at QB this year. If someone they like happens to fall to 8 it will be interesting. If it’s one they really like we will either get a nice haul in a trade down or have a QB competition in camp.

I don't know why this is hard to comprehend. We can only speculate if they think Darnold can be revived but one thing for sure is that having him on the team gives us more options.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Darnold = insurance and doesn’t make us trade away too many picks for a QB or settle on whoever makes it to 8. He allows us to take the BPA. They are comfortable with him at QB this year. If someone they like happens to fall to 8 it will be interesting. If it’s one they really like we will either get a nice haul in a trade down or have a QB competition in camp.

From Gantt's article about the Bridgewater trade...

The Panthers cleared the way for new quarterback Sam Darnold to work without any kind of cloud over his head or doubt about his status, trading incumbent starting quarterback Teddy Bridgewater to the Broncos for a 2021 sixth-round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

From Gantt's article about the Bridgewater trade...

The Panthers cleared the way for new quarterback Sam Darnold to work without any kind of cloud over his head or doubt about his status, trading incumbent starting quarterback Teddy Bridgewater to the Broncos for a 2021 sixth-round pick.

And Brees has us taking Fields per Tepper. Another exchange of opinions. If Darnold had a cloud over his head over Teddy he isn’t going to cut it as a starter in this league...

  • Pie 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

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...