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!

     

A good and fair article about 1st round QB's

teeray

By teeray,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

the major point from our perspective is if you're looking for a franchise QB, no round better to find one than the first

the pats weren't looking for a franchise guy when they took Cassel. They most likely weren't looking for a franchise guy in 2000 when they took Brady in the 6th because they already had Bledsoe starting and his emergence was spurred by happenstance more than Belichick itching to put him on the field. It just so happened that Brady had what it takes and Belichick's offensive system was able to bring it out of him

We're looking for a franchise guy if we're looking for a QB. We're pissing in the wind if we take a Christian Ponder in the 4th to be an eventual starter. That's what this thread is about. I'm not sure if teeray got lost trying to explain himself further but that's my interpretation of this article.

It's not impossible to find a franchise guy in the later rounds, but it is infeasible

The point is well taken that if you are looking for a franchise guy you better be looking in the early rounds and not simply focusing on the later ones or at undrafted guys. I wouldn't go as far as to say that NE wasn't looking for a franchise guy with Brady or Cassel but that they had the luxury to pick up a guy and develop him because they already had their franchise guy. We on the other hand may not if Clausen isn't the one, so we really don't have the luxury to develop a project in the later rounds. We need a guy with the talent to start so we need to be looking in the first round as you said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Contributor

teeray

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If Cam can't compete with Clausen, then I personally don't think he should be the #1 pick. But yes if he isn't drafted to compete for the job right away, then I would consider him a backup.

I would not anticipate Cam starting from day one.

He may not get as much time as he truly needs to develop but I don't see him starting day 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chef17 Apprentice

chef17

Posted
Posted

I would not anticipate Cam starting from day one.

He may not get as much time as he truly needs to develop but I don't see him starting day 1.

I would be fine with him not starting as long as he can at least compete. Based on what we saw last season, if a QB can't at least compete with Clausen, then he isn't worth drafting IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Contributor

teeray

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would be fine with him not starting as long as he can at least compete. Based on what we saw last season, if a QB can't at least compete with Clausen, then he isn't worth drafting IMO

Well, I know this will sound crazy, but I think even if he is better than Clausen from day one Clausen will start the season at QB.

For two reasons, one they want Clausen to generate some sort of value for himself so they can eventually move him. Second they just may not want to throw Cam in to the fire on day 1. Let him watch form the sidelines a couple of weeks before letting him go.

So if he doesn't start form day doesn't necessarily mean Clausen is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chef17 Apprentice

chef17

Posted
Posted

Well, I know this will sound crazy, but I think even if he is better than Clausen from day one Clausen will start the season at QB.

For two reasons, one they want Clausen to generate some sort of value for himself so they can eventually move him. Second they just may not want to throw Cam in to the fire on day 1. Let him watch form the sidelines a couple of weeks before letting him go.

So if he doesn't start form day doesn't necessarily mean Clausen is better.

I don't see a new HC starting the worse QB in his first season. Pretty sure that would piss off the entire locker room. And I don't seem Cam coming into the NFL looking great, I would expect him to have rookie struggles. So if he looks better than Clausen, what makes you think Clausen will be able to generate any value?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

Well, I know this will sound crazy, but I think even if he is better than Clausen from day one Clausen will start the season at QB.

For two reasons, one they want Clausen to generate some sort of value for himself so they can eventually move him. Second they just may not want to throw Cam in to the fire on day 1. Let him watch form the sidelines a couple of weeks before letting him go.

So if he doesn't start form day doesn't necessarily mean Clausen is better.

more likely they start the vet they bring in.....you ain't gonna keep a lockerroom starting Clausen if he doesn't look to be better than what we saw last season.

I think that is why Rivera keeps telling Smitty to wait and see what they are doing

as far as Clausen goes....either he fits or doesn't. If he doesn't fit....2nd rounders can get tossed to the side after 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Rodgers was drafted to sit until Favre retired or sucked, not to start right away. I consider any guy not drafted to start immediately as a backup. I'm not saying they will never start, but they were drafted with the intent to sit behind another guy. I just have a differing opinion of backups I guess.

Up until the past 5-10 years that would have included everybody. It has only been in the last decade or so with escalading contracts that any rookie ever started and didn't sit behind the starters. What you have is a very narrow definition of backup which is that if they don't start day 1 they are a backup. That doesn't account for whether they were drafted as a backup or are simply not the starting guy at present. For me that is very diffrent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chef17 Apprentice

chef17

Posted
Posted

The moral of the story is that the article is neither good nor fair and the support to back it up is also neither good nor fair

Haha I agree with the article, most Franchise QBs are taken in the first round but common sense tells me that. Franchise QBs are the best QBs, first round QBs are the ones thought to be able to become the best. So it would make sense to find your Franchise QB in the first round. Don't need an article to tell me that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

The moral of the story is that the article is neither good nor fair and the support to back it up is also neither good nor fair

I actually disagree. The article makes a very valid point that if you are looking for a franchise guy and don't have the time to develop someone for years or the luxury to have a few guys bust until you find one, you need to look in the first round. There is no guarantee that things will pan out but the odds are surely better than in rounds 2 or lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chef17 Apprentice

chef17

Posted
Posted

Up until the past 5-10 years that would have included everybody. It has only been in the last decade or so with escalading contracts that any rookie ever started and didn't sit behind the starters. What you have is a very narrow definition of backup which is that if they don't start day 1 they are a backup. That doesn't account for whether they were drafted as a backup or are simply not the starting guy at present. For me that is very diffrent.

My definition is narrow I guess. To me there are 32 starters, everyone else is a backup. There are different kinds of backups, such as career backups or backups like Rodgers who are expected to start in the future. But I consider both backups, just different kinds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

I actually disagree. The article makes a very valid point that if you are looking for a franchise guy and don't have the time to develop someone for years or the luxury to have a few guys bust until you find one, you need to look in the first round. There is no guarantee that things will pan out but the odds are surely better than in rounds 2 or lower.

YOU NEEDED THE ARTICLE TO TELL YOU THAT YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING A BETTER QB IN THE FIRST ROUND?

Holy poo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

upside/potential and expected return are two different things

i'm sure as with most any player that gets drafted they show potential beyond what you'd think their expected production would be, but if Brady had shown the Pats that much when they were scouting him they wouldn't have waited until the 6th. At the time they probably expected him to be your ordinary late round QB

I doubt they were waiting for Brady or necessarily looking for a franchise guy when they drafted Brady. He was the BPA at that point and they liked enough about him to give him a shot and develop him. That is the point really. If we had been bringing in guys routinely and developing them like other teams we wouldn't be in the boat we are now. We drafted Clausen last year but still need to upgrade the position so we are considering taking another guy in the first. We are doing it that way because we need to find a franchise guy and can't wait for years to develop someone.

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

    • raleigh-panther
      Predictions from Charlotte observer sports writers

      By raleigh-panther · Posted

      Fowler: Bucs 23, Panthers 16. Baker Mayfield only won a single game when he was an unimpressive Carolina starter, but somehow he’s 5-0 when playing AGAINST the Panthers. For the Panthers to pull off this upset, they’ll need to score at least in the mid-20s. With Tampa Bay relatively healthy following a mini-bye (and Mike Evans’ return is huge), it feels like this will be too tough a task. Kaye: Bucs 24, Panthers 20. The win-loss-win-loss streak comes to an end. It’s hard to trust the play-calling following the loss to the New Orleans Saints. The Panthers know what’s on the line, but they also knew last week, too. It’ll be close; I just have trouble trusting a positive outcome after a defeating one on the road. Zietlow: Panthers 38, Bucs 35. This prediction goes against conventional wisdom, but then again, conventional wisdom doesn’t seem to apply to these Panthers. This group, after all, has yet to lose back-to-back contests since Weeks 1 and 2. I think they win this one to make Week 18 interesting — and yes, that’s even with motivated Baker Mayfield and future Hall of Famer Mike Evans in good form. Why not?
    • Hoenheim
      Week 16 - Other NFL Games

      By Hoenheim · Posted

      Sam developed into a different player after he mostly sat for a year and learned a ton by being in that QB room under Shannahan in San Francisco.  Then he went to the Vikings who have a poo load of talent and another genius level offensive mind at HC in Kevin O Connel. I think they genuinely built up his confidence in a way he never did in New York or Charlotte.  He would not have been the same player if he stayed here IMO. Especially if he had been involved in that disaster season with Frank Reich in 2023, that might have cooked his confidence for good.  I guess you could argue we wouldn't have been that bad if we also kept cmc and dj i guess. 
    • Moonraker
      Canales and Darnold

      By Moonraker · Posted

      Willis was impressive last night given the circumstances. GB and SF seem to just have it figured out as far as QB goes.   It's frustrating, but I enjoy seeing our old players find success elsewhere. 
×
×
  • Create New...