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!

     

QB situation getting worse for the Panthers.


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, t96 said:

I'm not sure Seattle is more desirable than us right now. They are in clear blow it up rebuild mode and don't even have much draft capital and while Carroll is still around he'll almost certainly be retiring soon. Neither is a good situation but I can see someone like Watson preferring us over Seattle right now.

Seattle is more desirable because they are an organization and head coach that has been to the playoffs 9 out of the last 10 seasons vs Matt Rhule who couldn't even beat a ranked college team

  • Pie 5
  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, t96 said:

I'm not sure Seattle is more desirable than us right now. They are in clear blow it up rebuild mode and don't even have much draft capital and while Carroll is still around he'll almost certainly be retiring soon. Neither is a good situation but I can see someone like Watson preferring us over Seattle right now.

I don’t see how they’re more desirable either. All those picks they just received would be gone. They’d now be exactly where they were with Wilson minus another draft pick most likely.

Seattle is positioning themselves nicely to use their 1st rounder on a QB next season. Also would be able to trade up using Denver’s picks if need be

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Zod said:

Now Seattle and Indy need QBs.

 

Both easily more desirable than Matt Rhule's Panthers. 

 

This ain't helping. We need to draft our prospect. 

I only think it hurts our chances at a vet QB (none of which seem like a great idea except Minshew IMO) - neither Seattle nor Indy have a 1st RD pick this year so if anything it takes a little pressure off us to reach and better opens the possibility of trading down.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, t96 said:

I'm not sure Seattle is more desirable than us right now. They are in clear blow it up rebuild mode and don't even have much draft capital and while Carroll is still around he'll almost certainly be retiring soon. Neither is a good situation but I can see someone like Watson preferring us over Seattle right now.

I don't see why any legit QB would want to come to the Carolina Panthers in 2022.

1) Our offensive line is among the worst in the NFL.

2)Our offensive scheme has been one of the most predictable and unimaginitive in the league for the past two seasons.

3) Our best offensive player can't stay healthy and is rumored to be on the trading block.

4) We have few draft choices so we won't be able to draft all the players we need or move the picks for players.

5) Our receiving core has 1 legit starter at WR, and he's never had more than 4 TD's in a sesason.

6) And, you can make an argument that we have the worst HC in the league. Most of us on this board, and the pundits in the media, all agree that unless we have a miracle season or at least finish .500, Matt Rhule is pretty much a "dead man walking". He has a 50/50 chance of being fired by mid season. Whoever would  come here needs to consider that he'll probably be playing for a new regime in 2023.

Why would any good QB want to come here?

At Seattle has extra picks to begin a rebuild this offseason and DJ Metcalf  lining up at WR.

  • Pie 5
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, we don't need to draft a QB

Just because we need one, doesn't mean we have to get one this year when they aren't the right QB at the draft position.

Taking a QB now just because we're in need of one, is more likely to set us back another 5 years than help propel us to be contenders.  Make the smart decision with an OT, spend wisely on FA, take our lumps this year, and make a run at a QB next year when we get back our full set of draft picks and possibly have a high pick of our own in the first as well.

Just look at all the teams that have tried to reach for a QB to fix the need when the player really shouldn't have been taken there, it doesn't work out and they're put into the vicious cycle that we're in now, where you try to fill that position every season and reach every time to do it (whether in the draft or through FA/Trade).

Point blank.... we're not contenders this year no matter what QB we get, and there isn't an elite QB option for the 6th pick in the draft.  So don't make a mistake, build the smart way, not the desperate way.

Edited by tukafan21
  • Pie 6
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With this year's QB crop, it sure would be nice to have a second round pick.....say, #38.  They could grab a good LT in the first, then a QB in the second. 

I don't expect any of this year's crop to rip up the league for a couple of years, if any wind up doing so.  But our QB depth chart is a vast wasteland.  Even if the guy they wind up drafting is not the answer, there is a spot for him unless he is worse than PJ and Darnold, which might be an accomplishment.

But alas, we don't have a second round pick.  Or a third.  We could possibly get one in a trade down, but that means we have to find a team salivating over somebody enough to part with multiple picks for our #6.

Don't despair, though.  PT Barnum was right.....and probably an optimist.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 2
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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...