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!

     

The "draft and groom future QB, sign a vet to start for 2 yrs" plan

frash.exe

By frash.exe,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
Posted

when was the last time it worked for a team that was in our current situation?

seriously think of an example of a team that had a horrible QB situation with a new head coach rebuild quickly by signing a vet at the same time as drafting a QB (in any round), sat that QB for two years while they made the playoffs with the vet they signed, and then enjoyed consistent success when their rookie QB was "groomed" enough to play up to an acceptable standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Happy Panther Grand Master

Happy Panther

Posted
Posted

when was the last time it worked for a team that was in our current situation?

seriously think of an example of a team that had a horrible QB situation with a new head coach rebuild quickly by signing a vet at the same time as drafting a QB (in any round), sat that QB for two years while they made the playoffs with the vet they signed, and then enjoyed consistent success when their rookie QB was "groomed" enough to play up to an acceptable standard.

Does the rookies initials have to be CM and the draft happens on the 28th?

Your exact scenario doesn't happen often because the exact scenario we are in doesn't happen often.

Plenty of QBs have done well after sitting under a veteran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KillerKat Grand Master

KillerKat

Posted
Posted

Ok, the only situation I can find is the 1999 Vikings when they brought in Jeff George and drafted Dante Culpepper when they went 10-6 with George starting then 11-5 the next year with Culpepper starting. However, that was the only good year they had with a winning record while Culpepper was the QB even though he himself played relatively good there. Maybe if he had a better team around him, they would've had more success. According to his numbers though he had a bad next 2 years after his first year starting and then a good next 2 years and then fell off the face of the earth after Gamble ended him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
  • Author
Posted · Hidden
Hidden

Anyway Philip Rivers probably qualifies

listen i don't want to be the asshole that says "no he doesn't" but no he doesn't

drew brees wasn't a vet and the Chargers drafted him relatively early, and no he wasn't that great before they drafted Rivers but he was world's better than what we have

and oh it's not that hard to find teams that were in our situation. the 2007 atlanta falcons were working with Joey Harrington

Link to comment
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

San Francisco Bil Walsh and Joe Montana

3 problems

Steve DeBerg had about as much on field pro experience by the time Walsh came in as Jimmy Clausen, he debuted in SF, like Jimmy Clausen debuted here, and Bill's 49ers were poo the two years before Montana truly took the reigns in 81.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ok, the only situation I can find is the 1999 Vikings when they brought in Jeff George and drafted Dante Culpepper when they went 10-6 with George starting then 11-5 the next year with Culpepper starting. However, that was the only good year they had with a winning record while Culpepper was the QB even though he himself played relatively good there. Maybe if he had a better team around him, they would've had more success. According to his numbers though he had a bad next 2 years after his first year starting and then a good next 2 years and then fell off the face of the earth after Gamble ended him.

so then if we have to go back more than ten years just to find an example that meets it most of the way, why are people acting like this plan is so chic and bulletproof like everybody's been doing it to rebuild a franchise with no QB since the dawn of the NFL? Like there's such overwhelming evidence that has proven this is the way to go if you're trying to win immediately and in the future...

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

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Off Season Thread

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      That's my biggest concern with making him the 2C.  You split up the Aho Jarvis bromance that accounted for a lot of points.  If Jarvis excels as a C, it could help the team even more though.
    • PanthersNCSU
      Barnwell - Ranking WR, TE, RB Groups in NFL

      By PanthersNCSU · Posted

      The Saints being that high is the one that killed me. Chris Olave might not know his name at this point, Shaheed is coming off injury as well, so 31 year old Brandin Cooks might be your best WR...coming off a 260 yard season over 10 games. Kamara is Kamara, but didn't have 1,000 yards last year and is about to turn 30.  Toss in the fact that Taysom Hill may be the best QB on the team and I truly don't understand Barnwell's thoughts beside seeing the names "Olave" and "Kamara" and going yep, that sounds better than "Chuba" and "Thielen". 
    • TD alt
      Barnwell - Ranking WR, TE, RB Groups in NFL

      By TD alt · Posted

      Now now now, I wouldn't say there is no logic, but there's just not a lot of in-depth thought put into Barnwell's  "analysis." Now to be fair to him (and other national writers), pre-season team rankings are basically clickbait. And...Barnwell, himself, said that "there's a lot of projection here." He basically admits that he doesn't know how the hell things are going to turn out with our receiver group. He also said that "I find myself" more intrigued by Coker than Legette; that does not mean that he said that fans should be, or that Coker will even be better than Legette (regardless of ESPN's per-route-run stat). So, yeah, Barnwell said some things, but even he has to basically admit that he doesn't know how bad or good that our playmakers will be in 2025.  Overall, what Barnwell is basically thinking is that the Panthers have gotten worse at the offensive skill positions, and baked into that is that others have gotten better. That's the argument in July (meaning, please don't give this any more weight than it's due). I would personally be surprised (not shocked) if we end up worse than the Titans, Pats and Giants at least. Once you throw in the Bills, Giants, Jets, Steelers, and even the Chargers, I personally think there are several teams' skill groups that may end up ranked lower than ours by the end of 2025.  @kungfoodudeis one of my dudes, but like others he is over the tipping point. He's had enough. Seeing is believing. I will say this though: Barnwell's piece is less about logic than just good ol' opinion. And to be honest, he might as well be a Huddler throwing out sh¡t in the summer based upon nothing but good feels or bad feels.  Our offense as a whole (just like any other team's) is going to depend upon the play of the O-line and especially the QB. How you can even rank the skill positions without expressly baking those two things in the cake is beyond me. I would dare say that that's not even logical. 
×
×
  • Create New...