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!

     

Remember when...

Marguide

By Marguide,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Marguide Newbie

Marguide

Posted
Posted

...everyone was saying to wait on the 2012 draft class to pick a QB?

The conventional wisdom was that the 2011 crop of potential QB's was very weak, that none were ready to start immediately, that we should grab Billy Volek, or Carson Palmer, or Donovan McNabb to get us through the year, and grab our long term answer in 2012 because it was loaded with blue-chip prospects.

As it sits right now, Luck and RGIII are the only sure 1st round prospects in the upcoming draft, with Tannehill possibly joining them. Few had either RGIII or Tannehill on their radar last year.

The 2011 draft produced 4 rookie starting QB's. Newton has looked like a potential superstar. Dalton has looked very good and appears to have a bright future. Ponder shows potential. Gabbert...well maybe there is still hope. Locker may get his chance next year, but has looked decent in his limited play.

Where would the Panthers be today had we taken the "wait for next year" approach? What do you think today's top conversations would be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jangler Newbie

Jangler

Posted
Posted

Where would the Panthers be today had we taken the "wait for next year" approach? What do you think today's top conversations would be?

Fire Hurney!

yeah yeah fug that he ain't no Cam Newton!

Fire Hurney!!!

FML

Who will we take with the first pick in the 2013 draft?

fug You Hurney!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marguide Newbie

Marguide

Posted
  • Author
Posted

We'd be with the 1st pick/Andrew Luck

becaus with out cam Our offense would've been as bad as our D and we very well might've went 0-16

That's possible. Figure we would have selected someone on D at number one, maybe Dareus or Peterson or Miller, so we might have been much better on D.

It is probably more likely we would be picking at 5 or lower and would have to sell the farm to get one of the top 2 guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jb_online Newbie

jb_online

Posted
Posted

CoolPepper is right, Smith would have left for sure. After losing a guy like that, many other key vets would probably follow. In a way, I wish Derek Anderson could have started a few games, just to see what he could do. I had a feeling that if Cam struggled (or in this case, never played), Anderson would have been a decent QB for us and may have won a few games as the starter.

I was on the fence about Newton and when Luck decided to stay at Stanford, I was disappointed. Now, I have eaten that crow and am singing along with the kids on the Cam Newton bandwagon, driving into the sunrise... maybe the best draft pick of the franchise and I didn't see it coming.

Best of Luck to the Colts, I'll take our guy.

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

    • MHS831
      Some homers' opinions of the OTs that we may realistically be able to get at 19

      By MHS831 · Posted

      You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1.  I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter.  So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate.  QBs are a great example.  Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith.  Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there?  Wharton (280lbs)?  So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover?  A deep free safety?  A quality center? A playmaking TE?  A DT to replace Robinson?  A wide receiver to balance the secondary?  Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right.  Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.  
    • strato
      Off-season topic: WWYD? Total Branding Redesign

      By strato · Posted

      Put Huey P Newton on the helmet. With his AK. 
    • csx
      Baldinger on the 2026 LB Class

      By csx · Posted

      We arent switching. Evero is 3-4 to the core. Given how 3-4 has been a noticeable characteristic of top defenses recently and we have drafted and signed players fir it  I dont know why anyone would think that's a good idea 
×
×
  • Create New...