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!

     

Go for Carr hard and save #9 pick?

Jmac

By Jmac,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

glenwo2 Grand Master

glenwo2

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 2/15/2023 at 3:04 PM, Jay Roosevelt said:

No vets. No bridges. DRAFT A QB!

Why Dont We Have Both GIF

On 2/17/2023 at 10:56 PM, TheMaulClaw said:

I totally agree we will get exponentially better with a franchise qb.  I think it just depends on if your really sold on one of the prospects this year.  I like Stroud the most, but deep down I'm a little unsure about all of them this year, but if I had to gamble it would be on Stroud.  I just don't think we have the draft capital to get him without significantly hamstringing this franchise for years to come.  The only way it becomes worth it is if he became a flat out star.

If we were to keep Darnold (Bearded Darnold only), we would have the most flexibility.  Darnold won't inhibit our cap much.  Darnold has improved.  We won't have to pay Carr 30 million dollars a year.  We won't lose our future draft picks. 

Two things can happen with Darnold.  Darnold improves because he is the starter going into mini and training camps.  Darnold will actually have one hell of a coaching staff around him for the first time.  He had Adam Gase and Matt Rhule...poor guy.   Then we win the NFC South with Darnold.

OR

We are back at number 9 next year, because Darnold truly sucks...but this time we are back at number 9 with amazing cap space and we will truly be just a qb away.

We are not just a qb away right now.  We need TE help.  We need another starting linebacker.  We need another receiver.  We need help at corner, I'm not sure if Jackson can return the same player.  We're going to need an opposite edge, and a 1 tech since it appears we're going hybrid 3-4 zone blitz.

 

 

This actually makes a ton of sense.

 

Which means it'll never happen.   😛

 

Besides, I don't think Frank would want to risk his first year to be a failure....

 

...then again, we have the Josh McCown factor so I don't know.

Edited by glenwo2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted

If these people--"draft a QB at all costs" looked at the past drafts, they would realize that it's more likely a failed experiment than successful one.  Oh, but "look the 2020 draft!!!" there are outliers in statistics for a reason.  Cue the "things have changed" or  "You have to take a swing" crowd.  No, you play the odds and right now we have a first year staff, very incomplete roster, weak QB draft and a couple of FA QBs that have played in the system that Reich uses.  This is a very simple answer to me.   Take off the QB blinders and see the big picture folks.

  • Flames 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Yeah and the Raiders chose McDaniels over Carr.

That should tell you what they think of Carr. Even being a good person and great leader they still gave him the boot. You don't have those weapons Carr had and not make the playoffs.

They literally couldn't afford to fire McDaniels. And again, the Raiders are one of the dumbest teams in the league. Trusting their judgment reinforces that you don't know much.

To be clear, it's all right to not know much about football...until you start acting like you know more than everybody else. That's when you come up looking really stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

If these people--"draft a QB at all costs" looked at the past drafts, they would realize that it's more likely a failed experiment than successful one.  Oh, but "look the 2020 draft!!!" there are outliers in statistics for a reason.  Cue the "things have changed" or  "You have to take a swing" crowd.  No, you play the odds and right now we have a first year staff, very incomplete roster, weak QB draft and a couple of FA QBs that have played in the system that Reich uses.  This is a very simple answer to me.   Take off the QB blinders and see the big picture folks.

Why do you think this is a weak QB class? Dane Brugler (who is pretty on point with his draft player rankings) has 4 QBs in his top 15 this year. I think the “weak class” comment comes up almost every year. If you aren’t getting a QB at 1 or 2, the QB you are drafting will have some questions. Allen, Mahomes, Watson, Jackson, Herbert for example all had questions about being successful in the NFL. You just have to trust the staff to do their job and we actually have a good one now.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted
Just now, ForJimmy said:

Why do you think this is a weak QB class? Dane Brugler (who is pretty on point with his draft player rankings) has 4 QBs in his top 15 this year. I think the “weak class” comment comes up almost every year. If you aren’t getting a QB at 1 or 2, the QB you are drafting will have some questions. Allen, Mahomes, Watson, Jackson, Herbert for example all had questions about being successful in the NFL. You just have to trust the staff to do their job and we actually have a good one now.

It is. Take last year's craptasic QB class as the comparison, sure, it looks fantastic.  Stroud and Young are good and AR/Levis are major projects. None are great.  Beyond those Hooker would have been a nice fall back play, but the ACL.  Go beyond that and most of these guys won't even make a NFL roster after cut downs. People are talking themselves into this being a better QB class than it actually is because we NEED one.  I'm willing to bet most of these people on here would not be hyping these guys nearly as hard if we had a solid QB and took a more pragmatic view of these QB prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
top dawg Grand Master

top dawg

Posted
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

They literally couldn't afford to fire McDaniels. And again, the Raiders are one of the dumbest teams in the league. Trusting their judgment reinforces that you don't know much.

To be clear, it's all right to not know much about football...until you start acting like you know more than everybody else. That's when you come up looking really stupid.

Do you really believe that Mark Davis is broke? I have a hard time believing that they "literally can't afford to fire" McDaniels. That would be unprecedented.

 

Hondo, I love your work, man. I read this week that Mark Davis is not firing Josh McDaniels and Dave Ziegler because he is broke. Is Mark Davis and the Raiders broke? --Thanks, man, Kyle T.

He isn't firing Josh McDaniels and Dave Ziegler because Mark Davis craves stability. Mark Davis understands what McDaniels and Ziegler are doing to make this franchise a sustainable winner. As far as the report of him being broke, according to an NFL source close to Davis: "That is complete bullshit. It is laughable, but I bet it got a lot of clicks."

The source added:, "This isn't the Oakland Raiders, and these are the Las Vegas Raiders. He made a move because he does have plenty of dough now."

https://www.si.com/nfl/raiders/the-black-hole-plus/josh-mcdaniels-dave-ziegler-mark-davis-derek-carr-darren-waller-las-vegas-raiders

Further evidence that that's bullshit.

https://raiderramble.com/2022/11/19/raiders-owner-mark-davis-cash-poor-nfl/

https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/looks_like_espn_panelist_was_wrong_about_mark_davis_being_cash_poor/s1_16460_38154152

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/sports/las-vegas-raiders/josh-mcdaniels-mark-davis-money-poor/amp/

When it sounds like it doesn't make any sense, it probably doesn't make any sense.

They didn't want Carr because they didn't want Carr. It has nothing and everything to do with McDaniels if you understand what I'm saying.

Edited by top dawg
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ForJimmy Grand Master

ForJimmy

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

It is. Take last year's craptasic QB class as the comparison, sure, it looks fantastic.  Stroud and Young are good and AR/Levis are major projects. None are great.  Beyond those Hooker would have been a nice fall back play, but the ACL.  Go beyond that and most of these guys won't even make a NFL roster after cut downs. People are talking themselves into this being a better QB class than it actually is because we NEED one.  I'm willing to bet most of these people on here would not be hyping these guys nearly as hard if we had a solid QB and took a more pragmatic view of these QB prospects.

Do you think many other classes would have more than 2 (Stroud, and Young), that could be week 1 starters? Most draft QBs are projects. Mahomes didn’t start for a while, Herbert wasn’t suppose to, Watson played 7 games, Allen played but looked awful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankw Grand Master

frankw

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

If these people--"draft a QB at all costs" looked at the past drafts, they would realize that it's more likely a failed experiment than successful one. 

I'd have to imagine the odds of striking gold on other teams discarded rejects turned reclamation projects can't be any better just saying. But let's pay Carr a boatload...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Do you really believe that Mark Davis is broke? I have a hard time believing that they "literally can't afford to fire" McDaniels. That would be unprecedented.

 

Hondo, I love your work, man. I read this week that Mark Davis is not firing Josh McDaniels and Dave Ziegler because he is broke. Is Mark Davis and the Raiders broke? --Thanks, man, Kyle T.

He isn't firing Josh McDaniels and Dave Ziegler because Mark Davis craves stability. Mark Davis understands what McDaniels and Ziegler are doing to make this franchise a sustainable winner. As far as the report of him being broke, according to an NFL source close to Davis: "That is complete bullshit. It is laughable, but I bet it got a lot of clicks."

The source added:, "This isn't the Oakland Raiders, and these are the Las Vegas Raiders. He made a move because he does have plenty of dough now."

https://www.si.com/nfl/raiders/the-black-hole-plus/josh-mcdaniels-dave-ziegler-mark-davis-derek-carr-darren-waller-las-vegas-raiders

Further evidence that that's bullshit.

https://raiderramble.com/2022/11/19/raiders-owner-mark-davis-cash-poor-nfl/

https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/looks_like_espn_panelist_was_wrong_about_mark_davis_being_cash_poor/s1_16460_38154152

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/sports/las-vegas-raiders/josh-mcdaniels-mark-davis-money-poor/amp/

When it sounds like it doesn't make any sense, it probably doesn't make any sense.

They didn't want Carr because they didn't want Carr. It has nothing and everything to do with McDaniels if you understand what I'm saying.

It was reported by SI, Bill Plaschke of the Los Angeles Times and others.

Granted they can't compete with the credibility of "Hondo" from RaiderMaven.com, but hey 😕

Link to comment
Share on other sites
45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Do you think many other classes would have more than 2 (Stroud, and Young), that could be week 1 starters? Most draft QBs are projects. Mahomes didn’t start for a while, Herbert wasn’t suppose to, Watson played 7 games, Allen played but looked awful. 

No I don't, but Young is at best somewhere between Tua and Murray and Stroud is a Fields clone.  Is that something I'm willing to give up the farm for?  No. Pull up our roster and tell me how a rookie QB, even if Stroud or Young (not happening) is making this team better?  The pipe dream is Levis and AR not only starting day 1, but also panning out.  Neither of those guys are plug/play and will absolutely bust if forced into action prematurely.

Edited by 45catfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
top dawg Grand Master

top dawg

Posted
Posted
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

It was reported by SI, Bill Plaschke of the Los Angeles Times and others.

Granted they can't compete with the credibility of "Hondo" from RaiderMaven.com, but hey 😕

Oh, now you're suggesting that Hondo doesn't know the Raiders? That's bullshit and you know it. Are you suggesting that Rapp Sheet doesn't know what he's talking about either? Come on, dude. Plaschke got it wrong, and anyone paying attention knows it.

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

    • kungfoodude
      Who will blow it Sunday?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      BPA comes with the caveat of positional value and roster need included. Never let the latter two completely overwhelm the first, however. Our FO seems to lean heavily into "WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE POTENTIALZ!!!" as a fourth category and often it seems as the #1 overall pursuit. With as many needs as this roster has, I am not going to get upset over a real roster upgrade at WR versus some reach at EDGE or whatever other extreme needs we have. Overall, I want to see the roster get better. There is far, far, FAR more than one offseason of work left to get this roster into the top 10-12 in the NFL. That should be the goal. 
    • kungfoodude
      Passer Rating Differential: A Key to predicting a teams playoff and championship potential.

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      I would say we are more likely to get smoked by Tampa, blast Seattle and then perplexingly lose to Tampa again. 
    • kungfoodude
      The Case for(or Against) Drafting/Signing a TE

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      In general, Dave Canales tends to target his TE's the least frequently of any position group(WR/RB/TE) during his three years of running an NFL offense.  However, if you notice this percentage has crept up over time. 2025 is the first year that TE has eclipsed RB in target percentage. Production has also gone up in 2025. This is a percentage of total output in each category. Canales has always used a very TE heavy offense. In fact, on average his offensive formations are 2 or 3 TE sets roughly 80% of all offensive formations. So, the question may be, with this uptick in total TE output, could an elite or top tier TE make a significant impact? I believe there is some evidence this may be the case. Here are a look at TE snaps and Cade Otten specifically. These are the snap percentages for all rostered TE's in every Dave Canales offense. The bolded cell is Cade Otten's whopping 96.46% of total snap counts in the single year he was in the Dave Canales offense in Tampa. This was overwhelmingly his career high. His production was higher with less utilization in 2024, however.    In conclusion, while I don't anticipate ever seeing a top 5 producing/Pro Bowl caliber TE performance in a Dave Canales offense, there does appear to be some evidence that an actual upgrade in our TE room would actually lead to increasing overall offensive efficiency. I think Otten's utilization rate does indicate that the splitting of time between our relatively even TE group would cede significant snaps if a far superior option were available. I believe this is an area we could(and should have this past offseason/draft) made a more concerted effort to get a dynamic TE threat, after the apparent failure that J. Sanders appears to have been.  
×
×
  • Create New...