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!

     

Official Steelers at Panthers GameDay Thread


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

No offense to you as I know what you are saying and where you are going with it but seriously fug PJ Walker and majorly fug sam darnold.   Back ups or not we have to do better then that.  Darnold is dog poo and walker needs to hit the xfl.   

 

Whether its fitt or whoever and with a new coaching staff I just simply cannot envision a scenario where we dont take a qb in the first or trade up to 2 to get one.    At some point you just have to do it instead of kicking the can down the road.  Will that qb fail, probably but you have to at least try and with a new coaching staff the timeline matches up nicely

Darnold could be a functional backup. But it would take an OC that is actually capable of game planning to what he can do. He's not someone I would want starting every game, but having him for an occasional fill in, why not for the right money. Am I saying I don't want better? Absolutely not. As a QB 2/3 going into camp with a new HC and creative OC, I'd be ok with it and let the chips fall where they may. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

No offense to you as I know what you are saying and where you are going with it but seriously fug PJ Walker and majorly fug sam darnold.   Back ups or not we have to do better then that.  Darnold is dog poo and walker needs to hit the xfl.   

 

Whether its fitt or whoever and with a new coaching staff I just simply cannot envision a scenario where we dont take a qb in the first or trade up to 2 to get one.    At some point you just have to do it instead of kicking the can down the road.  Will that qb fail, probably but you have to at least try and with a new coaching staff the timeline matches up nicely

image.png.4f76dfd9b9c020df505c773bac3fef68.png

Geno has resurrected his career with decent parts around him.   We can get a decent FA to steady the ship until the right time to draft a first round QB.  Reaching is not good.

Now, let's say Richardson falls to Seattle and they want him, do you think they are going to let Geno Smith hold that back?  Same here, if we sign the likes of Minshew, Mason Rudolph, Jacoby Brissett, or re-sign Darnold.  Teddy was truly the one we thought would be a bridge QB, the Mayfield and Darnold experiments was about winning now.  I'm good going back to a bridge QB scenario, for now, and filling out the rest of the offensive side of the ball with legit weapons.

I still refer to the Steelers and the Big Ben model. They were a complete team that just needed a franchise QB.  We are a shell of a team looking for a savior.   Which one of those scenarios is likely to play out well?

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

image.png.4f76dfd9b9c020df505c773bac3fef68.png

Geno has resurrected his career with decent parts around him.   We can get a decent FA to steady the ship until the right time to draft a first round QB.  Reaching is not good.

Now, let's say Richardson falls to Seattle and they want him, do you think they are going to let Geno Smith hold that back?  Same here, if we sign the likes of Minshew, Mason Rudolph, Jacoby Brissett, or re-sign Darnold.  Teddy was truly the one we thought would be a bridge QB, the Mayfield and Darnold experiments was about winning now.  I'm good going back to a bridge QB scenario, for now, and filling out the rest of the offensive side of the ball with legit weapons.

I still refer to the Steelers and the Big Ben model. They were a complete team that just needed a franchise QB.  We are a shell of a team looking for a savior.   Which one of those scenarios is likely to play out well?

Smith is the aberration and not the norm.   Out of your list I would go Brissett-minshew 2 or 3 year deal and then draft a guy in the first.

 

To your second point, as I have said 2x today now, I think a qb like Stroud wins the nfcs next year.  I think he is the perfect game manager type that is smart enough to play as a rookie and do reasonably well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

Smith is the aberration and not the norm.   Out of your list I would go Brissett-minshew 2 or 3 year deal and then draft a guy in the first.

 

To your second point, as I have said 2x today now, I think a qb like Stroud wins the nfcs next year.  I think he is the perfect game manager type that is smart enough to play as a rookie and do reasonably well

We will not be able to get Stroud, not unless the tank is back on. I'm not believing the mocks that have Levis going ahead of Stroud.  The Texans will get QB1, period, end of story.  So you think QB2 will fall all the way down to us?  I have also stated today that Fitts should be fired for trading up.  There's no generational QB in this draft to justify it. Again, I get the desperation at QB, but at this point it makes little sense to draft a QB sitting where we are now on the draft board.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

We will not be able to get Stroud, not unless the tank is back on. I'm not believing the mocks that have Levis going ahead of Stroud.  The Texans will get QB1, period, end of story.  So you think QB2 will fall all the way down to us?  I have also stated today that Fitts should be fired for trading up.  There's no generational QB in this draft to justify it. Again, I get the desperation at QB, but at this point it makes little sense to draft a QB sitting where we are now on the draft board.

There doesn't have to be a generational guy to trade up. Those are very rare. It's about finding a QB who can be developed and turned into an above average QB because that's about the best you can realistically expect. If we traded 3 1sts and ended up with the next Allen or Mahomes, should he be fired because neither of those were considered generational talents. The right system, the right coach, the right offense make such a huge difference it's not on the QB alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

There doesn't have to be a generational guy to trade up. Those are very rare. It's about finding a QB who can be developed and turned into an above average QB because that's about the best you can realistically expect. If we traded 3 1sts and ended up with the next Allen or Mahomes, should he be fired because neither of those were considered generational talents. The right system, the right coach, the right offense make such a huge difference it's not on the QB alone. 

This are a typical results, correct?  You cherry picked one of, if not the prime, exceptions to the rule.  Not being a douche, but should I post the results of the 99% of times this didn't work?

Edited by 45catfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

This are a typical results, correct?  You cherry picked one of, if not the prime, exceptions to the rule.  Not being a douche, but should I post the results of the 99% of times this didn't work?

How about Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts? It doesn't matter if there is a generational talent at QB. Picks are irrelevant if you get it right. If you give up 3 1sts and get your QB for the next 15, you win. To say you should fire a guy because he trades up because you don't think there is a "generational talent" is asinine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

How about Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts? It doesn't matter if there is a generational talent at QB. Picks are irrelevant if you get it right. If you give up 3 1sts and get your QB for the next 15, you win. To say you should fire a guy because he trades up because you don't think there is a "generational talent" is asinine. 

Lamar and Jalen were flyer picks. I hope you understand that.  What's asinine is giving up 3 1sts rounders in this QB class. "You win" is easy to say as a fan, but the busts and middling QBs are WAAAAAY more common and sets back a franchise in the real world.  Sorry, but you dismiss the franchise QB drafting process as trivial.  Simply move up, grab a guy, and presto! Problem solved!  Dude, if it were only that easy.
There's a reason why that 10-ish area of the first round to the mid-20s are largely void of QBs in most drafts...teams know if there isn't a a top 10 QB worth taking, then hold off until the end of the round, top of round 2, for a flyer pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Lamar and Jalen were flyer picks. I hope you understand that.  What's asinine is giving up 3 1sts rounders in this QB class. "You win" is easy to say as a fan, but the busts and middling QBs are WAAAAAY more common and sets back a franchise in the real world.  Sorry, but you dismiss the franchise QB drafting process as trivial.  Simply move up, grab a guy, and presto! Problem solved!  Dude, if it were only that easy.
There's a reason why that 10-ish area of the first round to the mid-20s are largely void of QBs in most drafts...teams know if there isn't a a top 10 QB worth taking, then hold off until the end of the round, top of round 2, for a flyer pick.

You're missing the point. I'm not saying getting it right is easy. You're saying there's no QB worthy of giving up picks in this draft class. That's not a certainty any more than trading 3 1sts will net you a franchise QB. Being able to identify talent, determine if he will fit into the system you are building/built, and acquiring that talent are key factors. I gave 4 examples of guys who weren't considered generational QBs coming out of college, but now are considered franchise cornerstones in the last 5 years. Every one of those guys would be the 1st pick of a draft and a GM would be congratulated for getting one for 3 1sts. 3 or 4 years from now you'll be able to say there were or were not any generational talents at QB in this draft. Right now, it's too early to make that call and it's just stupid to say that you know how good their careers will be before they play one snap in the NFL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

You're missing the point. I'm not saying getting it right is easy. You're saying there's no QB worthy of giving up picks in this draft class. That's not a certainty any more than trading 3 1sts will net you a franchise QB. Being able to identify talent, determine if he will fit into the system you are building/built, and acquiring that talent are key factors. I gave 4 examples of guys who weren't considered generational QBs coming out of college, but now are considered franchise cornerstones in the last 5 years. Every one of those guys would be the 1st pick of a draft and a GM would be congratulated for getting one for 3 1sts. 3 or 4 years from now you'll be able to say there were or were not any generational talents at QB in this draft. Right now, it's too early to make that call and it's just stupid to say that you know how good their careers will be before they play one snap in the NFL. 

Great 4 examples.  Cherry picking.  Let me rattle off a list that's not cherry picking: Rosen, Wentz, Winston, Mariota, Bortles, Manziel, Manuel, RGIII, Tannehill, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder, Sanchez, Freeman and so on and so on and so on and the list could go on forever.

You're good with a swing and a miss. I'm not, especially giving up 3 first rounders and saying 'at least we tried.'

Also, what system?  We don't even have a staff in place for next year.  We are able to identify QBs for a system that we don't even have yet?  Again, better wait until next year.  Heck, even the Fields guys are lamenting an ill-fit with the Bears and the lack of talent.  So is it Fields or is the Bears' coaching staff and/or organization failing to coach him and put pieces around him?

Let the staff have a year to get their feet wet and then decide what QB they want moving forward.  Then if they want to move up for a QB, that may be more palatable.  Don't worry, we still will picking relatively high, not that using future draft capital bothers you much even if we actually do well.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 45catfan said:

This are a typical results, correct?  You cherry picked one of, if not the prime, exceptions to the rule.  Not being a douche, but should I post the results of the 99% of times this didn't work?

Please post the 396 QBs taken in the last 5 years of the draft are the rule that make up that 99%. I gave 4 that are the exceptions. It should be easy for you to list off the almost 400. I'll wait. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

Please post the 396 QBs taken in the last 5 years of the draft are the rule that make up that 99%. I gave 4 that are the exceptions. It should be easy for you to list off the almost 400. I'll wait. 

Lol, I posted the partial list of a looooooooooooooong list of busts, but hey, I guess it's a little less than 99%.  The point you are arguing the semantics of the math settles my case.   Have a great evening sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Lol, I posted the partial list of a looooooooooooooong list of busts, but hey, I guess it's a little less than 99%.  The point you are arguing the semantics of the math settles my case.   Have a great evening sir.

There's not a long list of busts in the past 5 years that massively overshadows those that have succeeded. 10 years wont see a ratio like that either. That wasnt my argument, that was yours. It wasnt a good one. Too many factors go into the success of a QB other than whether or not they're a generational talent. 

If a new coach, OC and Fitts or whoever is GM decide that there is a QB worthy of trading to acquire, then they should go for it. They should also be held accountable for that decision once it plays out. If at that time, they bust on a trade for a QB, then it's time to decide if they need to stay or go. But saying someone should be fired for making a trade before that player even has a chance to play a down makes no sense. 

And you're not going to get a good HC by telling then they're stuck with Darnold, PJ and MC or whoever we manage to sign and can't make a trade to get a QB if they see one they like. If we don't have the right evaluators and coaches in place before we draft it won't matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

There's not a long list of busts in the past 5 years that massively overshadows those that have succeeded. 10 years wont see a ratio like that either. That wasnt my argument, that was yours. It wasnt a good one. Too many factors go into the success of a QB other than whether or not they're a generational talent. 

If a new coach, OC and Fitts or whoever is GM decide that there is a QB worthy of trading to acquire, then they should go for it. They should also be held accountable for that decision once it plays out. If at that time, they bust on a trade for a QB, then it's time to decide if they need to stay or go. But saying someone should be fired for making a trade before that player even has a chance to play a down makes no sense. 

And you're not going to get a good HC by telling then they're stuck with Darnold, PJ and MC or whoever we manage to sign and can't make a trade to get a QB if they see one they like. If we don't have the right evaluators and coaches in place before we draft it won't matter. 

Right, because 5 years and under are still on their rookie contract.  It's hard to call them busts...yet.  They are still having the tires kicked.  Pickett-meh.  Trevor, probably pans out (#1 overall).  Wilson benched.  Lance injured.  Jones--looking at a handing Belichick a losing season.  Burrow--the real deal (#1 overall).  Tua--injury-plagued (above average).  Herbert***the REAL exception***. Murray#1--looking like a bust.  Daniel Jones--likely FA, Haskins (RIP) bust.  Baker-Bust! Sam-simi-bust.  Allen--Legit.  Rosen-B-U-ST!!!  Trubisky BUST.  Mahommes-REAL DEAL.  Waston-Moments, but legal issues.

So you got, #1 overall withstanding (not moving up that far)  Herbert, Allen and Mahommes.  Tua is having a good season--his first but it's too early to crown him yet.

I have yet to see this pattern of QBs that are can't miss prospects.  Granted, the miss rate is slowing declining, but it's still very prevalent.

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

    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...