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!

     

Today's Game

Catsfan69

By Catsfan69,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, MillionDollarCam said:

They get an entire offseason… not three days of practice.

Scouts say all the time that the practice is more important because they can judge a players intangibles and ability in a one on one setting.

None of these guys are going to come in and save a franchise right away but that doesn’t mean Willis, Howell, Pickett, etc. aren’t capable of becoming an NFL QB based off of this game.

An entire offseason, plus most rookie QBs struggle at first. The only one who looked ok early was Mac last year in a “loaded” QB class (and he ran a basic run first offense).  These scouts are looking at their mental and physical abilities and seeing if some of the best minds/coaches in sports can help mold them into NFL stars. I agree 100%. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Year of the Tiger Rookie

Year of the Tiger

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

If you want the #1 overall pick in 2023, start Cam next year. 
 

The upside is high draft picks and can probably resign DJ for cheap bc he’s stats would be terrible. 

This is why Cam should be the QB.

You either get the top '23 pick or he gets back to MVP form like we saw vs. Washington this year, but brings that each week

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

An entire offseason, plus most rookie QBs struggle at first. The only one who looked ok early was Mac last year in a “loaded” QB class (and he ran a basic run first offense).  These scouts are looking at their mental and physical abilities and seeing if some of the best minds/coaches in sports can help mold them into NFL stars. I agree 100%. 

Going back to what you were discussing before, if you're given the choice between "consistently good" and "occasionally great", always take "consistently good".

I've seen "consistently good" turn into "consistently great" way more frequently than I can recall seeing "occasionally great" morph into "consistently good" and eventually become "consistently great".

If you want an example, the hope of "occasionally great" turning into "consistently good / great" is what Matt Rhule was banking on when he picked up Sam Darnold.

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

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

The big losers in this game have been the offensive linemen. I get that this is format is unfairly biased to the defense. The OL and QBs/WRs need more communication work then the defense by and large, but the pass protection and run blocking both have been a struggle on both sides of the ball the majority of the game. Not good for the OL involved.

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

MillionDollarCam

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The big losers in this game have been the offensive linemen. I get that this is format is unfairly biased to the defense. The OL and QBs/WRs need more communication work then the defense by and large, but the pass protection and run blocking both have been a struggle on both sides of the ball the majority of the game. Not good for the OL involved.

Might be more of a reason to take an OL early. The depth might not be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Year of the Tiger said:

Hopefully you have the Bengal Tigers winning the Super Bowl in the Chinese Year of the Tiger. In the time of the China virus, when China Joe is President .. when the Bengals have Joe Burrow, and Joe Mixon. I think you need the help moron. 

Yep. It's him 🙄

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

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Going back to what you were discussing before, if you're given the choice between "consistently good" and "occasionally great", always take "consistently good".

I've seen "consistently good" turn into "consistently great" way more frequently than I can recall seeing "occasionally great" morph into "consistently good" and eventually become "consistently great".

If you want an example, the hope of "occasionally great" turning into "consistently good / great" is what Matt Rhule was banking on when he picked up Sam Darnold.

The Darnold move was more of Rhule banking on himself, thinking he was the smartest coach in the league. No one else was that interested for a reason and we were basically bidding against ourselves. The his arrogance jumps to a $18.5 million extension because he was so confident he could “fix” a QB the league had already given up on… If McAdoo really liked Allen and Mahomes the best in their class, he is liking the higher risk/reward QBs. If he is having any influence and we are looking at QBs, Willis probably has his attention. Rhule might be still thinking he can fix Darnold…

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

    • CRA
      Post- Training Camp 53-Man Roster Projection

      By CRA · Posted

      This is about getting open and YAC....and the QB we have.  You basically are just highlighting average depth when targeted vs 2 players. .  And yeah, I often say AT is a small slow reliable TE in terms of what he does for us.   That's what he is.   I think a couple of you want to make this into a Renfrow argument.   I'm a Renfrow fan.  Renfrow does not check the box of what a BY O needs either at the slot.  Renfrow just a niche roleplayer at this level.  it's easy to look up how horrific AT is with the ball in his hands and in terms of getting open.....and it's also easy to look up what a low ceiling of an offense the steady AT diet produces w/ BY. 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Panthers' content round up

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      The one time he's actively tried to lose was the best we've ever done.
    • CRA
      Post- Training Camp 53-Man Roster Projection

      By CRA · Posted

      I simply acknowledge BY is the QB.  And just like we did when we drafted him.....the type O you would need to setup around him for success was always pretty simple.  But we have done virtually the opposite.  XL dropping some passes isn't why we were ranked the 32nd O and 30th passing the past 2 years.  *Ricky Prohel was brought up only in regards to role function he served on the team.  Niche/specialist.   He wasn't eating up the snaps in the O.    AT should have a similar snap %. People could MAUL Ricky Prohel and put hands all over him.   We got to the Super Bowl in part because we were mauling guys (our slot CB).   You can't do that now.  AT has a MUCH easier life and still can't get open.  Or run.    If you live in 3 WR sets, with a weak armed QB, and you choose to put someone who can't get open or run in the slot.......well, your are going to have a weak pass O.  That's by design IMO.  
×
×
  • Create New...