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!

     

Is drafting a QB the plan now?

AU-panther

By AU-panther,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Shocker Grand Master

Shocker

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, FugginPoo said:

Bet they draft Pickett

Could happen he is the most ready “supposedly”.  I hope they hire or speak to expert QB scouts and make the right call.  Even if it is NO QB

If they draft someone need to be sure he is better than Darnold.  lol

Edited by Shocker
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MHS831 Grand Master

MHS831

Posted
Posted

I think they will go with BC at LT and might give Brown, Elflein, and Jordan a shot at LG....if we do not take a QB, we will trade back.

To your point, there was a tweet that said the Panthers are not interested in Baker Mayfield (because the head coach and QB can't both have immaturity issues).  Seriously, it could mean that they are not interested in the free agency market. 
I still see us dealing for Minshew--(what I wanted them to do last year, when he was cheaper).

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

Smittymoose

Posted
Posted

No. The plan is to not have to force a pick for a specific position. This gives Carolina the full panoply of options. I still believe they would like to trade down if the right deal is there, but this opens them up to take a pass rusher, a tackle, a quarterback, or yes, a cornerback depending on the value. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smittymoose Experienced

Smittymoose

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I think they will go with BC at LT and might give Brown, Elflein, and Jordan a shot at LG....if we do not take a QB, we will trade back.

To your point, there was a tweet that said the Panthers are not interested in Baker Mayfield (because the head coach and QB can't both have immaturity issues).  Seriously, it could mean that they are not interested in the free agency market. 
I still see us dealing for Minshew--(what I wanted them to do last year, when he was cheaper).

Bozeman also has a ton of LG experience, so it's possible too they go BC - Bozeman - Elflein - Corbett - Moton with Erving as a swing guy. Which, really, is a pretty nice OL. Gives you the option of drafting a LT, kicking Bozeman and BC inside one spot, and moving Elflein to your interior OL swing.

 

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

Jmac

Posted
Posted (edited)

No upside to drafting a QB just to draft one. If they are not convinced that he is "the one', then don't do it. Much rather they choose a younger guy with NFL experience and some upside. There is a couple on the market who fit that bill. He doesn't have to be a barn burner, a Jake D. type can get the job done.

Edited by Jmac
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...