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!

     

With the first pick, don't draft a QB? Draft a DE? C'mon!


TD alt
 Share

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I can't answer your question because I can't see us taking a non QB #1.

 

If we talking #2 pick then I could answer your question.

 

You can't make me answer something that I don't believe will happen. But if it makes you feel better I would probably take Hunter #1 over Tmac just because he's higher on my list of prospects. 

So let me get this straight....

You're not okay with taking a non QB at #1

You think there are 2 Elite QBs in this class

But you're okay taking a non QB at #2, despite your above belief?

You're just proving my point in that you don't actually think there are 2 Elite QB's as much as you just don't like the idea of not taking a QB if drafting 1st overall.  

So again, argue for a QB all you want because you like the player, but taking a player at a position solely because of the draft slot is not the way to build a successful franchise.  I could respect you saying you'd take Hunter over taking a QB just because it's the #1 pick.

I'd still disagree, because I think Hunter is a CB in the NFL and I'm not taking a CB over a WR anywhere in the Top 5 of the draft when we already have Horn and need a true outside #1 WR.  But again, I'd at least respect that decision over the QB just because of the position and draft slot.

Edited by tukafan21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

 

Again, mock drafts are trying to predict what will happen and QB's are always over mocked even in a down QB year because teams tend to draft them. 

Thank you for saying what I have been trying to explain to you all day.

 

QB's are always over mocked! You said it i said it. So why are you denying Sanders/Ward going #1 is a legit possibility.

 

 

It's because they are QBs and they will likely be the first prospects off the board regardless of talent. Thank you for finally agreeing with my point.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

So let me get this straight....

You're not okay with taking a non QB at #1

You think there are 2 Elite QBs in this class

But you're okay taking a non QB at #2, despite your above belief?

You're just proving my point in that you don't actually think there are 2 Elite QB's as much as you just don't like the idea of not taking a QB if drafting 1st overall.  

So again, argue for a QB all you want because you like the player, but taking a player at a position solely because of the draft slot is not the way to build a successful franchise.  I could respect you saying you'd take Hunter over taking a QB just because it's the #1 pick.

I'd still disagree, because I think Hunter is a CB in the NFL and I'm not taking a CB over a WR anywhere in the Top 5 of the draft when we already have Horn and need a true outside #1 WR.  But again, I'd at least respect that decision over the QB just because of the position and draft slot.

I have Ward #4 on my prospects list.

 

My top 4 in order are Sanders/Hunter/Tmac/Ward

 

If we have the #2 pick and Sanders is off the board I'm taking Hunter at #2.

 

Do you understand now? I'm trying to dumb this down the best way possible, but you keep not understanding. I have been saying this the entire time.

 

Again so you won't keep asking my top 4 in order are Sanders/Hunter/Tmac/Ward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CamWhoaaCam said:

Thank you for saying what I have been trying to explain to you all day.

 

QB's are always over mocked! You said it i said it. So why are you denying Sanders/Ward going #1 is a legit possibility.

 

 

It's because they are QBs and they will likely be the first prospects off the board regardless of talent. Thank you for finally agreeing with my point.

 

 

This response is absolutely and utterly insane, I've literally this same thing out multiple times in previous posts about mock drafts, like a bunch of times.

I've never once denied it's a possibility of them going #1, I've just said that I wouldn't take them there.

And YET AGAIN, you're proving that you don't believe they are elite QB prospects, you literally just said "first prospects off the board REGARDLESS OF TALENT"

It's literally what I've been saying this whole time, these QB's don't have the draft grades to deserve that pick.  They're only being mocked there because mocks are trying to predict the draft, not saying who deserves to be drafted where.  

Dude, this is exactly why I question your reading comprehension skills.  You keep trying to say you got me with something, but in those exact posts you're just proving my points, the literal opposite of catching me in some lie or moment of ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

I have Ward #4 on my prospects list.

 

My top 4 in order are Sanders/Hunter/Tmac/Ward

 

If we have the #2 pick and Sanders is off the board I'm taking Hunter at #2.

 

Do you understand now? I'm trying to dumb this down the best way possible, but you keep not understanding. I have been saying this the entire time.

 

Again so you won't keep asking my top 4 in order are Sanders/Hunter/Tmac/Ward. 

Okay, so answer this one then, since you said you can't answer something you don't think will happen......

You have said numerous times in the past that even though you want them, you don't think Deion will allow us to take his son or Hunter.

You then taking Ward #1 over T-Mac just because he's the QB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

Okay, so answer this one then, since you said you can't answer something you don't think will happen......

You have said numerous times in the past that even though you want them, you don't think Deion will allow us to take his son or Hunter.

You then taking Ward #1 over T-Mac just because he's the QB?

Yep that's exactly what I would do.

 

If we stay at #1 take the QB. I have said this the entire time. If Sanders doesn't want to play here listen to whoever wants to trade up and select him. If the offer is great then take the offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

Yep that's exactly what I would do.

 

If we stay at #1 take the QB. I have said this the entire time. If Sanders doesn't want to play here listen to whoever wants to trade up and select him. If the offer is great then take the offer.

Fine, then how about this

We end up at #1 with the Raiders at #2, Shedeur explodes into an elite prospect but Deion won't allow us to take Shedeur, we bluff someone else trading up to #1 for Shedeur and Deion convinces them to give us #2, along with multiple 1sts and 2nds.  We then pull a Texans from last year and flip those extra Raiders picks and whatever else it takes to trade into #3 with whoever has it to have back to back picks.

We then take Ward #2, T-Mac #3, everybody happy.

Yes, this is 99% joking, but honestly, it's not exactly impossible to happen if Shedeur did explode by the draft and Deion did that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your options are QB or trade down. I can see the argument for both of those options, but staying at 1 and picking a non-QB is a disaster. You sacrifice an absurd amount of value.

You can only trade down a few spots if you still want to stay in that top elite player range. Probably end up still getting the guy you would have taken at 1 anyway. Staying put at 1 and going with a non-QB seems like such a fugup that it shouldn't even be considered an option. So that's probably what the Panthers will do.

 

  • 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

    • Running or being able to run the ball allows you to control the game. You control the pace, score, and time of possession. It does also allow your defense to rest and when they do get on the field, go 100%. That in turn forces the opponents offense not have 3 and outs. That's huge pressure, if the other team is just running the ball while having 14 plays drives.  If you are able to get 3.5 yards a carry and mix in smoke routes that gain similar while allowing the clock to run......you control the game.  Deal is nearly all rules changes in the 25 years have helped the passing part. Young folks and gambling folk want to see 37-45 scores. Those 10-16 score teams are poison and toxic, I don't care personally just win. I can enjoy a 6-3 slug-out just the same as 50-42.  There just too many factors to go over. Running used to be important for playoff ball, cause it was before half the league got domes. Running the ball in snow, cold, wet conditions was the path. Like NE played in that awful division each for 20 years during the Dynasty run, they normally had the #1 seed and home field. Thats why bill always had a #1 defense and enough offense to win. It was a huge advantage.    I have thought you need to pass in order to score, THEN you must be able to run the ball with 7minutes remaining to keep the other teams offense off the field. But if you're setup to pass and get no experience during the game to try rushing plays, who knows what you can do. So I feel you truly need a balanced attack, that's the key and main goal. Run for first downs went you need too and pass for TDs when you need too.       
    • The whole team seemed to be in a funk that game. At the end of the day I think the Super Bowl week and everything that came with it paired with the coaching staff stubbornly refusing to make any significant changes for their opponent was a perfect storm of circumstances that is exactly how you lose a Super Bowl. When you add the refs and the league blatantly trying to get Peyton Manning a walk off into the sunset ring it's a wrap. We needed someone with attitude willing to fight back. I wish we had 89 just for that one game. I think the result would have been different. He wouldn't have let that bullshit fly. He may have gotten himself ejected in the process. But it would have lit a fire under the rest of the team. Just my opinion.
×
×
  • Create New...