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!

     

Panthers met with Hooker per report


raleigh-panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, rayzor said:

There is nothing spectacular about him, but spectacular is what is needed. He could be a really good QB later on. There's just too many issues and not enough of the really good stuff to make you think you can build on and around him. 

The one thing that did impress me is he didn't wilt in the big moment. While he may not have always been a success, he didn't play with fear. That's something we haven't seen since Cam when he was healthy. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, rayzor said:

I could see a mid-late season start because of injury to another QB. Otherwise we probably wouldn't see much of him til the next season.

Which would make him finally starting at 27 years old? Oof....

And that’s where my problem comes.. Him not getting on field development until he’s 27 and his 2nd contract being a issue as he turns 31..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

The one thing that did impress me is he didn't wilt in the big moment. While he may not have always been a success, he didn't play with fear. That's something we haven't seen since Cam when he was healthy. 

I can see that. I just wanted to see more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see us with Hooker, and the game is on the line and we're behind a score and him putting up a valiant fight...and still losing.

I can see Levis in those situations making a bold move and then saying "Dammit, Will!" and losing.

I can see Young, Stroud, and Richardson in those situations and making something special happen. 

I want one of those three.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2023 NFL Draft Big Board: PFF's top 100 prospects

28. QB TANNER MCKEE, STANFORD

McKee is already well-equipped to operate an NFL offense given what he was asked to do at Stanford. He’s one of the most accurate quarterbacks in the class and pairs that ability with lightning-quick processing. McKee’s career time to throw at Stanford is a swift 2.49 seconds.  

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2023-nfl-draft-board-big-board

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheSpecialJuan said:

2023 NFL Draft Big Board: PFF's top 100 prospects

28. QB TANNER MCKEE, STANFORD

McKee is already well-equipped to operate an NFL offense given what he was asked to do at Stanford. He’s one of the most accurate quarterbacks in the class and pairs that ability with lightning-quick processing. McKee’s career time to throw at Stanford is a swift 2.49 seconds.  

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2023-nfl-draft-board-big-board

 

remember the name he's perfect for what Frank Reich looks for in a QB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, top dawg said:

Yes we are, but you did not address the thinking of Jeremiah about not being surprised if Hooker ends up with the best career out of all the QBs in this draft. 

wasn't directed at you was directed at people in this thread freaking out about meeting with him. It would be negligence if we didn't do our due diligence on all of these guys. 

As far as Hooker being the best of all of these guys. Yea of course that could happen. Drafting a QB is kind of a crapshoot, that being said there are some serious concerns about his age, the system he played in and his health 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SOJA said:

wasn't directed at you was directed at people in this thread freaking out about meeting with him. It would be negligence if we didn't do our due diligence on all of these guys. 

As far as Hooker being the best of all of these guys. Yea of course that could happen. Drafting a QB is kind of a crapshoot, that being said there are some serious concerns about his age, the system he played in and his health 

I'm thinking that if it wasn't for the injury, he might even be ranked higher than Levis or Richardson. He may not be ready ready until he's 27. That sounds like day three to me.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I'm thinking that if it wasn't for the injury, he might even be ranked higher than Levis or Richardson. He may not be ready ready until he's 27. That sounds like day three to me.

totally agree. Now if he is available in the rounds 4-5 you take that guy because you may have just found a Kirk Cousins type player. I'm fine with throwing multiple picks at QB this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, top dawg said:

I'm thinking that if it wasn't for the injury, he might even be ranked higher than Levis or Richardson. He may not be ready ready until he's 27. That sounds like day three to me.

The most famous QB in Dallas Cowboy history, Roger Staubach, didn't enter the NFL until he was 27 due to a 4 year stint in the Navy. He didn't become a full time starter until age 29. I'm not saying Hooker is the 2nd coming of Staubach, but I don't think him entering the league at age 25 is in and of itself a big factor in determining how well he plays in the NFL. In fact, the older and maturity could turn out to be a huge positive in his favor.

  • Pie 5
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 think he did a solid job.  Honestly I liked his post game interview the best.  He gave himself a C and said he left a lot out on the field.  That kind of attitude can carry him far.
    • This is lacking a fairly considerable amount of context. For one, Adams(age 22) started 12 of 16 games, had 38 rec, 446 yds and 3 TD's on 66 targets(18 less, with 2 less games started). The main thing missing here is that the top two WR's for Green Bay that year combined for about 2800 yds and 25 TD's. Now if you want to throw a more accurate dart at Adams, take a look at year two. This year the production was spread around considerably and Adams didn't stand out from that pack(pun not intended).  So, if XL struggles mightily this season, I would probably keep that comparison in your quiver to counter argue. I would suggest that I don't think that scenario is probably very accurate for most HOF caliber WR's taken in the first round over the past 15 or so years. Adams was the 89th pick overall, as well. A little different hill to climb than XL, although not massively.
    • to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
×
×
  • Create New...