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!

     

Matt Corral our 2023 starter


Panthers Fan 69
 Share

Recommended Posts

The whole point of the conversation is whoever is going to be our HC is going to let both QBs compete for the job.  No HC is going to just give the job to the #1 pick.  It is not a good move by any coach just to hand the job at any position to a high draft choice.  

Most coaches say, draft position doesn't matter once you start workouts.  Tell me I'm wrong.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

The whole point of the conversation is whoever is going to be our HC is going to let both QBs compete for the job.  No HC is going to just give the job to the #1 pick.  It is not a good move by any coach just to hand the job at any position to a high draft choice.  

Most coaches say, draft position doesn't matter once you start workouts.  Tell me I'm wrong.

 

Your wrong

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with Corral coming in to compete for a roster spot. Relying on a guy who looked really bad and then hit IR before the season started would be a bad strategy.

If we draft a guy at the top of the draft, and we will, then it shouldn't even be a competition unless they draft poorly. It's Ickey and BC all over again from this year. All we did was waste time and reps to get ready for game 1, there should never have been a competition. Play Ickey or you are already admiting you fugged up so just give him the reps. Unless we trade back then play the rookie or you fugged up. 

If they like Corral so much then don't sign a vet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Waldo said:

I have no problem with Corral coming in to compete for a roster spot. Relying on a guy who looked really bad and then hit IR before the season started would be a bad strategy.

If we draft a guy at the top of the draft, and we will, then it shouldn't even be a competition unless they draft poorly. It's Ickey and BC all over again from this year. All we did was waste time and reps to get ready for game 1, there should never have been a competition. Play Ickey or you are already admiting you fugged up so just give him the reps. Unless we trade back then play the rookie or you fugged up. 

If they like Corral so much then don't sign a vet.

Corral cannot practice until august

free agency is in march

they are signing a vet

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

1 hour ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

The whole point of the conversation is whoever is going to be our HC is going to let both QBs compete for the job.  No HC is going to just give the job to the #1 pick.  It is not a good move by any coach just to hand the job at any position to a high draft choice.  

Most coaches say, draft position doesn't matter once you start workouts.  Tell me I'm wrong.

 

You are not wrong that they say this.

You are wrong if you think they mean it.

Please cite for me an instance where a HC has sat a highly drafted rookie QB behind a lower round might as well be a rookie prospect.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 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 was watching a YouTube and it was said that scout and GM insider types were saying the NIL had killed rounds 4-7. I don’t know that I buy it, seems like it might for a year or maybe two but then those guys have to move on.  NCAA is apparently about to give 5 years of eligibility. It is gonna skew those entrants older maybe.   
    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...