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!

     

If We Don't Go QB in the 1st Round, Who is Your QB?

Proudiddy

By Proudiddy,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Highlandfire Newbie

Highlandfire

Posted
Posted

Say we go Green, Fairley, or another non-QB and don't trade down in the 1st.

Who do you think could come in and provide legitimate competition to be a starter?

I've already said I'd like to take Jake Locker, but I think he's gonna go in the 2nd so I don't know if we'll be able to.

Other than him, I like Tyrod Taylor.

Who would you prefer? Colin Kapernick is interesting as well, but I think he's gonna get broke in half in the NFL.

Andy Dalton

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Urrymonster Newbie

Urrymonster

Posted
Posted

if you are going to have a vet QB on the sidelines, i would rather it be someone with some actual playtime. he has been in the league for 10 years and started 10 games...most of which he has lost. sorry, thats not somehting that is appealing to me. i would rather have someone who has won in the league than a lifetime scrub helping our QBs.

i don't see what is so appealing about a guy that has a 3-7 career record who has been in the league for 10 years. sorry, i would not consider that solid. why the appeal? he's just that guy you mention when you a desperate for a scrub QB backup and you can't think of anyone else.

I appreciate that, but who can we get who has won in the league? McNabb, possibly, but he will likely come with a big $ sign and really struggled this year.

Likewise, where do we draft this QB? Non of the QBs in this draft have come anywhere near to the #1 pick in talent and we will literally be taking 'another guy' simply because we need a QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

it's surreal how much people reject drafting and developing in this fanbase.

oh, that's right, because they're looking for the easy way out of here. QBs you don't have to develop in your system, don't spend too much, blah blah blah. We got incredibly lucky with Delhomme, and everyone thinks it's going to be that easy again. Moreover, we had two awful QB coaches. Rip Scherer did a terrible job coaching this unit, and Mike McCoy barely did anything and skated by for so long only because Jake played decent enough.

Some of us don't reject drafting and developing at all, we just question if Jimmy Clausen can be developed, and definitely don't want to go into next season without a plan should he fail to develop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LaChance87 Newbie

LaChance87

Posted
Posted

I agree a vet needs to be brought in, it will not be Moore, if they were sold on him they would have never drafted Clausen. I would like to see a Hasselbeck, Bulger, or Kitna. I've mentioned this a few times, but a guy I really liked this year and thought played fairly well was Shaun Hill.

Young has a good record as a starter but for one, I consider him immature, and injury prone. Not someone I really want to see here.

McNabb did pretty good in Philly, always thought he was overrated. He had a few good games in Washinton but they already want him out, and I don't like the though of him here.

Alex Smith- Had a few good games, but he's had time to prove himself and has not.

At some point I read about whoever we draft, even if it had of been Luck they are going to have their struggling rookie season, as most rookies do. Bradford had a decent season but 6 games were played in the weak NFCW, so yeah he should have statistically had a better record than other rookies. So alot of people expect for all rookies to struggle execpt Clausen. His rookie season was below average and people think we should give up on him. Seems like a double standard to me. In Clausen's defense no quarterback would have had decent season standing behind that line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pox 08 Newbie

Pox 08

Posted
Posted

The only rookie QB I can think of that was even close to as miserable as Jimmy to have turned around their career to be something great may have been Aikman (and I don't recall if he showed promise or not early)...

Clausen wasn't just lacking in success, he was lacking in everything that matters at the position.

Don't forget Orton. Orton was even more of a check down king than Clausen was his rookie year. His per completion average was 5.1, Clausen's was 5.2, and Clausen was a tiny bit more accurate.

Bears wrote Orton off , despite the fact that the play calling for the Bears' offense was extremely bland... almost as vanilla as the Panthers play calling. When he went to the Broncos, we saw how much of an impact a quality offense minded coach can have on a qb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...