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!

     

Corral deserves a fair shot


Jmac
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Martin said:

What do you think of in terms if reps when you say give him an opportunity to compete? I would hate to take reps away from Young, so I’m curious what you think it would look like?

Ummm, enough to at least develop him some in order to have a future backup QB or would you prefer if Bryce ever goes down that we just throw someone into the fire that has never even had any practice reps at all?

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I'm not saying MC is the future. But not giving him an opportunity to compete is downright foolish. I think we just look at things differently and that's OK. 1st or 250th, draft position doesn't matter, only results.  You start the guy who gives you the best opportunity to win, no matter where he was drafted. 

And FYI, I don't think MC beats out BY. My hope is we develop him and he shows off enough to be able to trade him like NE with Jimmy G. I don't think he will accept a backup role if he proves to be a decent starter, whether by injury or playing when the game is out of reach. 

I noticed most of the ones who think even giving Corral a shot to develop into a backup in this thread have some sensitive little threatened feelings. For some reason trying to develop Corral into a backup or great trade bait unfortunately is like 3D chess to them. Mostly though they think somehow if any other QB is developed that it means hating on Bryce Young and is a whole Cam Newton situation over again like how Cam had haters for no reason. They are too stupid to realize Bryce is the number one guy and will be moving forward but Corral needs to be developed into a backup or trade bait and not just given his walking papers because they are scared of having another younger QB on the roster for fear it will be another Cam getting hate situation all over again. I mean, we should just talk about the elephant in the room instead of tiptoeing around it. Nobody is stupid here and does not see the narrative they are trying to paint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ricky Prickles said:

Ummm, enough to at least develop him some in order to have a future backup QB or would you prefer if Bryce ever goes down that we just throw someone into the fire that has never even had any practice reps at all?

I agree with this. It sounded like some folks wanted a 50/50 competition straight up, but I might have misread the comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

BY should get the majority to start camp, if he's ready to take them, which he should be. AD and MC should split what's left. I would think something like a 65/15(AD)/20(MC) split. Depending on how they respond and progress or regress, adjust accordingly. Rinse and repeat. 

Makes sense. Also, it’s been stated that Dalton doesn’t need that many reps which could potentially shift work to Corrals advantage if he shows progress.  I think BY is first priority and rightfully so, but I don’t think Corral will be an afterthought if he shows promise.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the pecking order should be fairly obvious.  Young,  Dalton, and Corral. 

During preseason, Corral should get more play time than Dalton, simply to see if he has anything. 

I don't expect him to beat out Dalton on the depth chart, and nor should he. Dalton is a good QB, and more than good QB2. 

 

Edited by pantherclaw
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

How we gonna develop him on the bench?

 

In order for him to get value he has to play games. I think the best way for him to show value is playing in the preseason. We already know what we have in Dalton. Young will get limited playing time as well because he's the starter most likely. Let Corral run the show in the preseason and go from there. If he shows something he might be worth keeping as a backup.

 

People have been trying to tell you this for 2 days. Now, all of a sudden, you are wanting to join in. lol

 

Nobody is proclaiming Matt the starter. All we want is for him to get some solid coaching, which he should get here. Then let the chips fall where they may. 

 

If he becomes an asset? That makes us a better team, and there Will be great rejoicing. And who doesn't love themselves some great rejoicing?

Edited by Gerry Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Got the wrong D.

 

Andy Dalton!

You referred to that other "D" QB several times.  Each time my heart skipped a couple of beats and my chest tightened.  Given my family's history of hearts attacking them, that was not nice.

What the heck did I ever do to you? 

And for the denser of our membership, yes, this is all tongue-in-cheek.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much of a potential mentor as Andy Dalton could be, I think we've got the coaching to negate the need for that aspect in a player. If Corral shows enough promise, I'd much rather dump Dalton and keep the young guy if we only roll with two QBs. I think BY has enough maturity and learning capacity that we won't really being hurt by going with two young QBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CamWhoaaCam said:

I been saying this from the start, you just seem to focus on me being a "Brycer". Pay attention and what I said still stands Bryce Young is the present and future of this team.

 

It hurts you when I say that huh?

 

Sure you have. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, run-run-pass-punt said:

As much of a potential mentor as Andy Dalton could be, I think we've got the coaching to negate the need for that aspect in a player. If Corral shows enough promise, I'd much rather dump Dalton and keep the young guy if we only roll with two QBs. I think BY has enough maturity and learning capacity that we won't really being hurt by going with two young QBs.

 

The thing is; Coaches only get so much time with the team. It's the Vet QB that shows the rook the ropes of being a QB. The ins and outs, and the nuances of leading a team. How to study, and how to take care of yourself. And so much more.

 

That Vet QB spends a heck of a lot more time with the Rook than any Coach. And Andy is considered one of the good ones.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/19/2023 at 8:53 PM, ForJimmy said:

We might roll with 3 QBs. Niners did, Eagles did, Steelers just extended Mitch and Mason with Pickett. With 17 game seasons more teams will roll with 3 QBs. We will probably have Young, Dalton, and Corral.

I think they NFL should allow teams to carry 3 QBs and not have the 3rd one count against the 53 man roster.  

  • Pie 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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...