OL vs QB, be carefull what you wish for

[frankw]

10 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Jet fans probably said the same thing about hoping to get something in a trade for him.

Maybe its not resigning Sam, but signing some midlevel vet.  The point is still the same, for all the people hoping to wait a year to draft a QB.  We could potentially improve the team enough where we don't' end up drafting a QB in 2023.

While possible I just don't see it. Not after how badly our last two attempts have gone. The benefits of a young quarterback with potential on an affordable rookie deal are being utilized more and more by teams who are having varying levels of success. If this regime is truly into the analytics they have rambled on about then I firmly believe we will see a rookie quarterback this year or next. People can say we could make a run at Watson or one of the other top tier quarterbacks but if it boils down to it I can say with near certainty they will choose a bigger market and better situation overall. If Rhule and Fitterer have any clue at all they will know by now what has to be done. Of course that’s the rub and why so many are now pessimistic. We'll see.

[Waldo]

8 minutes ago, Growl said:

Your premise is flawed, it’s centered around the idea that a team makes a QB, and not that a QB makes a team. We’ve seen more than enough evidence to prove that. A franchise QB is going to bring out a lot of positives, and diminish and a lot of flaws. Saying you don’t see a “franchise QB” in this class is not only subjective, it’s irrelevant. 
 

Drafting a QB in the top 10 is about as good of odds you’re going to get on finding a franchise guy, and if he flops extraordinary, then you’re in a position to take another guy. Either is preferable to the idea of “building around the QB” or “leaning on the run game” that so many here have so many nostalgic memories of and long to see replicated, because you’re just going to end up picking 10 or 15 or 19 or 21 year in and year out and likely out of reach for what it takes to build a team that can contend for a super bowl-a Quarterback.

also, “make much positive impact on the 2022 season”

who cares? What does this mean? The point of the draft isn’t about “making a positive impact on the current season.”

it’s about evaluating opportunity cost relative to impact over the course of the next 10 seasons. 

Lol, what are you even arguing? If you want to live in fantasy land, I said I can respect your choice. The rest is really not worth the time. Cheers.

[Sgt Schultz]

A lot of IFs in this equation.  Too many to really break down the possibilities. 

It really all boils down to this.  IF the tea leaves all lined up and we had nearly the best possible outcome, that shifts where the focus goes to try and reach the next level.  IF an improved Darnold is decent enough to get us to 9 wins but no further, that should be relatively obvious.  The only additional IF is whether the organization wants to get to the next level or it is content winning 7-11 games every year (2 either side of what was proposed). 

IF the answer to that last IF is they are satisfied being a consistent playoff contender/entrant but not getting to the next level, they run with Darnold.  IF they want to get to the next level, they pull an LA Rams and try to trade for an existing QB that can get them to the next level, or a KC (and maybe SF) and trade up in the draft to grab whoever has caught their eye at the QB position and see what happens.  Both models can work, one just potentially mortgages more of the future (if nothing else, it costs more of the salary cap) than the other. 

But again, all that is based on everything else aligning almost perfectly.  Almost everything regressed last year.  As BlitzMonster said, IF somehow all that happened my opinion of Rhule would change because it would mean he actually learned and adapted.  Or he got extremely lucky, but if that was the case he should be buying lottery tickets while on that roll.  I don't see that happening, but it is not an impossibility.  Just highly improbable.  Probably not as improbable as all the other IFs materializing, but improbable nonetheless.

[Growl]

3 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Lol, what are you even arguing? If you want to live in fantasy land, I said I can respect your choice. The rest is really not worth the time. Cheers.

You could’ve just said, “yeah, you’re right “ I wouldn’t have thought less of you for it.

[ForJimmy]

OP isn’t saying we pay Sam to a huge deal. If Sam plays serviceable and our team is improving there us a chance he could get signed to an average contract. It would also put us out of range for Young/Stroud/and other top prospect.  We could basically become what the Colts are. Is that good or bad? I’m not sure…

[Waldo]

Just now, Growl said:

You could’ve just said, “yeah, you’re right “ I wouldn’t have thought less of you for it.

See fantasy lol. Have fun chasing unicorns.

[AU-panther]

11 minutes ago, onmyown said:

As much as I hate the qb moves made so far, really the only opportunity to get one in the past several years was Herbert, and no one really knows how feasible that was.

There was Lamar Jackson if the FO had the foresight to see Cam was done. But we did still have Cam.

Corse this is based on Fields and Jones not working out which I find hard to fathom.

And no I’m not considering FAs since they laugh when they hear the Panthers.

Building a stout team first or until the opportunity arises isn’t exactly a bad plan, nor a disproven blue print. The problem is if you’re not finding a qb you can’t be doing dumb poo (trading for Darnold, amateur drafts moves) and you actually have to be building that stout team.

The Panthers aren’t doing that. In fact I’d argue they’re regressing.

You actually make a good point, look at the past 10 drafts and when we picked, how many chances did we really have for a QB.  You can't really count Herbert because he went before us, no idea how much a trade up would have been.

We could have had Lamar or Mahomes or Watson, but there are plenty of years where we really not in a position to take a QB that has turned out to be good.  This is why this idea of building a team and finding a QB when it is convenient is laughable

QBs are the hardest part of the puzzle to find, if you think you have a chance to draft one you like you do it.

 

 

[Growl]

1 minute ago, Waldo said:

See fantasy lol. Have fun chasing unicorns.

It’s okay, I get it. A lot of fans just like being along for the ride, and that’s okay. Big picture conceptual discussions or draft philosophy that is more complex than “just coming away with a good player” is a lot like witchcraft to these individuals. No shame in it man. 

[scratched]

1 hour ago, AU-panther said:

For all those that want OL instead of QB, which is a valid thought, what if:

We draft a LT that plays well his first year

BC moves to guard and plays well

Our new OL coach, who has a great reputation, helps improve the rest of the line.

Our WR core plays up to their potential.

CMC comes back healthy and stays that way.

Our new OC helps Sam improve.

Horn comes back healthy.  

The other young guys on defense continue to improve.

We go 9-8 and 

Tepper decides to keep Rhule 

and we 

Resign Sam

Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for in life.

Honestly by being greedy and waiting to get a new QB we actually might increase our chances of not getting a rookie QB at all.

 

 

We all agree we need QB and OL... I am of the opinion you cant truly see what you have at QB if the OL is nearly if not the worst in the league.. What I would like to see is sign OL help in the FA market, trade down in the 1st and sign someone like Ritter, or for all we know, Corral or Willis could be there. But I am 1000% on board with getting the OL fixed first. While this board is made up of opinions, I'll just throw this out there... SIGN FA TRUBISKY, draft OL, S, and LB help. See what happens... I think Trubisky beats Darnold out for the starting job, we have a QB who is still fairly young in Trubisky. Draft QB next year to groom after getting everything else fixed!

[BlitzMonster]

I think institutional accountability is a really important philosophy for any large organization.

Rhule pushed all his chips in with Sam Darnold.  Now Tepper has to hold Rhule accountable for that decision with Darnold starting in 2022.  

If Darnold falls on his face (a fairly good chance of that happening) then Rhule has to pay the consequences for his decision -  which means being fired.

No going after other free agent QB's this year.   No drafting a QB with pick #6.  Play the guy you wanted and let the chips fall where they may.  

That's what it means to be responsible for your decisions.  

[AU-panther]

1 hour ago, BlitzMonster said:

I think institutional accountability is a really important philosophy for any large organization.

Rhule pushed all his chips in with Sam Darnold.  Now Tepper has to hold Rhule accountable for that decision with Darnold starting in 2022.  

If Darnold falls on his face (a fairly good chance of that happening) then Rhule has to pay the consequences for his decision -  which means being fired.

No going after other free agent QB's this year.   No drafting a QB with pick #6.  Play the guy you wanted and let the chips fall where they may.  

That's what it means to be responsible for your decisions.  

so, you sacrifice a year for the fans and the other 52 players on the team to prove a point to Rhule?

If you feel that strongly you should have fired him already.

I do agree though that if Tepper I'm not going to let him do something drastic such as spending a bunch of draft capital to move up or to overpay for a QB in free agency, but if there is a logical upgrade I'm not going to forego it just to prove a point.

 

 

[Eazy-E]

3 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

The only way we would resign Sam Darnold is if he throws for over 4k yards and 30+ TDs and less than 10 TOs.  If that happened, our OC would be gone after this year for another HC gig. 

This is exactly what Rhule envisioned happening last year and the Media was totally buying into it after our first 3 games. Everyone was talking about Golden Boy Joe Brady and him leaving and becoming the next Sean McVay. Funny how quickly things changed.

[Aussie Tank]

4 hours ago, AU-panther said:

For all those that want OL instead of QB, which is a valid thought, what if:

We draft a LT that plays well his first year

BC moves to guard and plays well

Our new OL coach, who has a great reputation, helps improve the rest of the line.

Our WR core plays up to their potential.

CMC comes back healthy and stays that way.

Our new OC helps Sam improve.

Horn comes back healthy.  

The other young guys on defense continue to improve.

We go 9-8 and 

Tepper decides to keep Rhule 

and we 

Resign Sam

Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for in life.

Honestly by being greedy and waiting to get a new QB we actually might increase our chances of not getting a rookie QB at all.

 

 

In this scenario Sam would have trade value and we’re finally in a Position to trade multiple firsts like the 49ers to move up for our QB 

[DeAngelo Beason]

O-line is the most important position group in football, period.  It's time to build it.  We have been complaining for over a decade as fans about our QBs getting blasted.