Ryan Poles trying to drive up the cost of the #1 pick

[Icege]

48 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

You apparently like having this team with no QB. Stay at 9 makes no sense. At 9 we won’t get a QB and if we do he fell to 9 for a reason. 

[45catfan]

51 minutes ago, NAS said:

I think this happens if they sign Derek Carr or another vet QB and draft a 'prospect' at #9 like Anthony Richardson.  

Signing a vet regardless.  Not going to go into the season with two QBs with zero regular seasons starts.  The level of the vet depends on where the QB is drafted.  Top 3, a cheaper vet, #9 or later, an expensive vet.

[45catfan]

3 minutes ago, Icege said:

All he'd have to do is Google QB draft history to find out his statement about QBs "falling" to #9 is utter nonsense.  Plenty of solid QBs have been drafted outside the top 5, even some outside the top 10.

[weyco2000]

1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Anyone thinking the Bears dropping from #1 to #9 is ANYTHING less than 3 first rounders--bare minimum, is hooked up to the hopium tank.  Probably a 2nd or 3rd thrown in there too.

I doubt they would do it for 3 first’s. 

[NAS]

3 minutes ago, weyco2000 said:

I doubt they would do it for 3 first’s. 

I think 49ers set the price two years ago but theirs was a late first.  I think Panthers should stay put at two first, a second, and a third.

[45catfan]

1 minute ago, weyco2000 said:

I doubt they would do it for 3 first’s. 

Hopefully, Tepper stays out of this, but I doubt it.  Maybe he learned his lesson form Rhule and lets the football people do their jobs he's paying them to do.  Obviously he's going to be in the loop, I mean influencing decisions.

[OldhamA]

1 hour ago, AceBoogie said:

There are two no doubt QBs. Just because you refuse to believe that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. 

Who are the two no-doubt QBs?

[NanuqoftheNorth]

1 hour ago, bigdog_10_2002 said:

The panthers drafted Jason Peter, no pick due to the Gilbert trade in 99 (98), and Rashard Anderson in 2000 (basically forfeiting three consecutive years of first round picks).  They were in the superbowl in 2003.

Weird, I don't recall seeing either Dom Capers or George Seifert at the 2003 Super Bowl.

Edited March 6, 2023 by NanuqoftheNorth

[NanuqoftheNorth]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The thing about those generational prospects is there's no trading for them. The team that lands #1 takes the guy.

I believe an argument could be made, that if the Bears were smart, they'd draft a QB with this year's #1 pick.  

Edited March 6, 2023 by NanuqoftheNorth

[LinvilleGorge]

5 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

I believe an argument could be made, that if the Bears were smart, they'd draft a QB with this year's #1 pick.  

If we're talking about risk, THAT would be the biggest risk a team could take in this draft. You have a young guy who has shown promise despite being surrounded by nothing. If you move him to take another QB you damn well better be right because if you draft a bust and Fields goes on to flourish elsewhere you're now officially the biggest jackass in sports.

[NanuqoftheNorth]

5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If we're talking about risk, THAT would be the biggest risk a team could take in this draft. You have a young guy who has shown promise despite being surrounded by nothing. If you move him to take another QB you damn well better be right because if you draft a bust and Fields goes on to flourish elsewhere you're now officially the biggest jackass in sports.

Or, Chicago trades Fields to a team in desperate need for a QB and utilizes this year's #1 to upgrade the position.  Ultimately, both teams involved (even Fields) could be better off for the trade.  Of course, most of these draft scenarios will never take place, much less, be sure bets.  If they were, we'd have little to converse about.

[CPF4LIFE]

3 hours ago, Mage said:

What has playing it safe got the Panthers organization? 

Exactly 

[KatsAzz]

3 hours ago, 45catfan said:

Lol, and us being the furthest back of the QB needy teams to move up would have to give up a TON to go to #1, but I'm getting flack for suggesting we stay put at #9.

Some of you guys would give up your first born child to move to #1. 

Copied post: ("I rather trade up to #3 and keep that extra 1st round pick we would lose if we traded with the Bears. We are guaranteed at least one of the top 3 QB's. They all same to be on the same tier as talents. I want Stroud but I would be happy with AR or Bryce at #3 or vice versa")

[45catfan]

4 minutes ago, KatsAzz said:

Copied post: ("I rather trade up to #3 and keep that extra 1st round pick we would lose if we traded with the Bears. We are guaranteed at least one of the top 3 QB's. They all same to be on the same tier as talents. I want Stroud but I would be happy with AR or Bryce at #3 or vice versa")

True, IF we do move up, #3 is better than #1 for me.  I don't want to move up at all, but keeping our 2025 first round pick while getting a top QB is the smarter solution.