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!

     

Worst Case Scenario

Rules&Regulations

Recommended Posts

ChinaPanther Newbie

ChinaPanther

Posted
Posted

Top 2 corners? So Gilbert and Dennard?

If that's the case. Fuller, Roby, and Verrett wouldn't be so awful. Ryan Shazier maybe? Jordan Matthews maybe. Kony Ealy? Dee Ford?

It's a deep draft, plenty of options.

 

I'm liking Shazier in this front seven. Hardy got double teamed against NO and the 49ers in the playoffs. Drafting Shazier would make that very precarious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpstatePanther Newbie

UpstatePanther

Posted
Posted

It's simple, you can't help who is gone but you still stick with BPA. Pretty easy concept to get

 

this faulty line of thinking is what gets teams 4-6 RB's while the rest of their needs suffer. the only way i support BPA is if it is "BPA according to needed positions". take the best OT, WR, CB, S, DT, TE, DE, RB available. and with the exception of OT and WR (of which we need 2 of each), we meet our need with one pick and move to another. ie, once a CB is picked, dont fuggin pick another. move to the next need. 

 

and even then... BPA is no indication of future production. i wonder if Everette Brown and Jeff Otah were BPA at the time we picked them? What about Jon Beason and Jonathan Stewart, who have been injured more than they've played?

 

sorry... the concept of BPA makes me angry. every time its suggested, it seems to be the lazy cop-out. "we shouldnt waste time researching which players best fit our scheme. lets just take whoever the fug the media decides is the "best" pick when its our turn! everything will turn out great then!" 

 

no offense to you Herbert. im not calling you stupid or anything. its the ideology im against. not you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRumGone Grand Master

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted

this faulty line of thinking is what gets teams 4-6 RB's while the rest of their needs suffer. the only way i support BPA is if it is "BPA according to needed positions". take the best OT, WR, CB, S, DT, TE, DE, RB available. and with the exception of OT and WR (of which we need 2 of each), we meet our need with one pick and move to another. ie, once a CB is picked, dont fuggin pick another. move to the next need.

and even then... BPA is no indication of future production. i wonder if Everette Brown and Jeff Otah were BPA at the time we picked them? What about Jon Beason and Jonathan Stewart, who have been injured more than they've played?

sorry... the concept of BPA makes me angry. every time its suggested, it seems to be the lazy cop-out. "we shouldnt waste time researching which players best fit our scheme. lets just take whoever the fug the media decides is the "best" pick when its our turn! everything will turn out great then!"

no offense to you Herbert. im not calling you stupid or anything. its the ideology im against. not you.

Best player available and a player who fits your scheme go hand in hand. He's your highest rated player because he fits into what you are trying to do on offense or defense.

It's actually not a cop out and furthermore it creates a lot of blithering idiots shouting from rooftops.

Watch what happens if we pick shazier in the first if he is our highest rated player. This place will go bonkers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpstatePanther Newbie

UpstatePanther

Posted
Posted

Best player available and a player who fits your scheme go hand in hand. He's your highest rated player because he fits into what you are trying to do on offense or defense.

It's actually not a cop out and furthermore it creates a lot of blithering idiots shouting from rooftops.

Watch what happens if we pick shazier in the first if he is our highest rated player. This place will go bonkers.

 

i will be one of the ones going bonkers most likely, albeit for a short period of time. i trust Gettleman after the magic he worked last offseason. but i cant for the life of me imagine why we need another OLB right now. we have two legitimate backups in Blackburn and Klein. if the team chose an OLB at any pick, i would not understand it. if we waste a 1st or 2nd rounder on a position that is nowhere near a need, i will be upset. i'll come to accept it and watch and see, but i'll initially be upset. 

 

i agree with you that this topic creates blithering idiots, and on both sides. most people who want the BPA dont make it clear that they want the BPA that fills the needs of the team. neither do they acknowledge that BPA is a relative term. BPA could also be interpreted as Best Fit Available, which could seem to be "reaching" to some people. there is a limit to the reasonable reach IMO, and just because a player is listed at the top of the media's big board at the Panthers' pick doesnt mean the Panthers should chose that player. BPA according to the Panthers' big board? sure. fire away. but people dont specify that either. 

 

perhaps its the ambiguity of the term "BPA" that aggravates me more than the concept itself. it just seems to me that some people would have the Panthers pick a bunch of random players that dont fill the needs of the team just because that player is listed on the top of the media's big board. thats the impression they give and it frustrates me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRumGone Grand Master

TheRumGone

Posted
Posted

i will be one of the ones going bonkers most likely, albeit for a short period of time. i trust Gettleman after the magic he worked last offseason. but i cant for the life of me imagine why we need another OLB right now. we have two legitimate backups in Blackburn and Klein. if the team chose an OLB at any pick, i would not understand it. if we waste a 1st or 2nd rounder on a position that is nowhere near a need, i will be upset. i'll come to accept it and watch and see, but i'll initially be upset. 

 

i agree with you that this topic creates blithering idiots, and on both sides. most people who want the BPA dont make it clear that they want the BPA that fills the needs of the team. neither do they acknowledge that BPA is a relative term. BPA could also be interpreted as Best Fit Available, which could seem to be "reaching" to some people. there is a limit to the reasonable reach IMO, and just because a player is listed at the top of the media's big board at the Panthers' pick doesnt mean the Panthers should chose that player. BPA according to the Panthers' big board? sure. fire away. but people dont specify that either. 

 

perhaps its the ambiguity of the term "BPA" that aggravates me more than the concept itself. it just seems to me that some people would have the Panthers pick a bunch of random players that dont fill the needs of the team just because that player is listed on the top of the media's big board. thats the impression they give and it frustrates me.

 

i understand what you are saying but i try and think of it kind of like this. obviously picking a QB or a RB or a OG or a C at the 28th pick is retarded. because the value wouldn't be there. it's kind of a mix of BPA and need.

 

but filling needs does not give you the best overall team. you keep drafting the most talented players on your big board. lets say at 28 we have a choice between shazier or morgan moses. would shazier be the better pick long term or would morgan moses? who would have the best impact on our team? id wager shazier would. our defense would change with shazier at the pick. we could be 10 times more creative even with TD on the field. Think big impact, game changing plays. Or a Tackle who can protect our QB. Who has the greater chance of succeeding at their position? Now what if we picked morgan moses to be our starting left tackle. Would he have a bigger impact on the overall team then shazier? thats where i think the argument needs to be. Who will have the bigger impact immediately but more importantly long term. Would you rather have an A+ player or a B player just because that B player fills a need. It gets tricky here, because i can see the argument that "well damn is Byron Bell going to be our starting left tackle?" i can see both sides but i wont freak the fug out if that is the pick.

 

it's all about impact, especially in the first two rounds. Who will have the biggest impact on your team for the immediate but most importantly the long-term. I just hope to god OBJ is there at 28 because i love that dude.

 

i firmly believe this guy is going to be special at the next level

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCwKdJUVrno

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judo Thoreau Enthusiast

Judo Thoreau

Posted
Posted

Plenty of good players will be around at 28. Not worried at all.

Worst case scenario:

Our entire draft contingent gets stranded in the wilderness somehow on draft day. The Panthers forfeit all of their picks. JR gets extremely frustrated and sells the team to some LA guy for pennies on the dollar. The trucks get packed up and head out the next day.

Fortunately, Goodell decides to award us another team. Unfortunately, a meteor strikes Bank of America stadium directly on the 50 yard line. No one is injured, but the stadium is totally destroyed. Goodell awards a 2nd team to Jacksonville instead. We're all sad.

The end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MV%doe Newbie

MV%doe

Posted
Posted

 

i had this thought awhile ago, heres a panthers big board

 

1. Greg Robinson, Auburn
2. Jadeveon Clowney, South Carolina

 

3. Jake Matthews, Texas A&M 
4. Taylor Lewan, Michigan 
5. Sammy Watkins, Clemson 
6. Khalil Mack, Buffalo 
7. Mike Evans, Texas A&M 

8. Eric Ebron, North Carolina

9. Marqise Lee, USC 
 

 

10. Kelvin Benjamin, Florida State 
11 Odell Beckham, LSU
12. Justin Gilbert, Oklahoma State 
13. Darqueze Dennard, Michigan State 
14. Brandin Cooks, Oregon State
15. Kyle Fuller, Virginia Tech 
 
16. Zack Martin, Notre Dame 

17. Morgan moses

18. Joel Bitonio, Nevada
 

19. Austin Seferian-Jenkins, Washington
20. Bradley Roby, Ohio State 
21. Anthony Barr, UCLA
22. C.J. Mosley, Alabama 


 
 
23. Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, Alabama
24. Jason Verrett, TCU
25. Calvin Pryor, Louisville 
 
26 Rashede hageman
27 dee ford

28 Aaron Donald 

29 louis nix
30 Timmy Jernigan

31 Kony Ealy
32 xaviver sua-filo

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

    • Aussie Tank
      I wake up this morning full of rage towards Ronald McDonald Rivera / Gettleman / Hurney

      By Aussie Tank · Posted

      I woke up this morning with a sore back and shoulder's 
    • tukafan21
      Tetairoa McMillan - Your 2025 NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year - (Welp... Guess I Was Right)

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      The bottom line is we saw long stretches this season where T-Mac wasn't even targeted.  He had games where he went an entire half without seeing a pass thrown his way, and it lead to a bunch of games with 5 or less targets.  If he's healthy and we're not up a stupid amount and only running the ball, I can't see him having more than a game or two next year with 5 or less targets. We were also only 22nd this year in pass attempts, and that was with a rookie #1 and no legitimate 2nd option for half the season.  And even then, we were only 46 pass attempts above 31st place. If we go into next season with T-Mac improved in his 2nd season and a healthy Coker for 17 games, there is absolutely no reason for us to not throw it more.  That right away increases both of their target totals without sacrificing any targets from each other or other players, add in them taking targets from the TEs and RBs on top of that, and your argument just doesn't hold water anymore. You can't look at targets/yards in a vacuum and think next year Coker just takes some from T-Mac.  You have to look at the team as a whole and our situations this year and then project what will happen next year. If he's healthy for 17 games, I'd bet my life savings that T-Mac sees increases across the board, targets/catches/yards/TDs.   Just as Coker will also see career highs in all categories, it's not one vs the other, it's shifting offensive strategy given our personnel, which next year will be much better for our passing game (QB issues aside).
    • tukafan21
      Tetairoa McMillan - Your 2025 NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year - (Welp... Guess I Was Right)

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      C'mon now.... First, you can't switch up your argument once someone points out a major flaw in your point. You're saying we shouldn't expect a big increase in targets/yards for T-Mac, but then shift to talking about averages with Chase when I point out the significant leap he took there once you factor in his missing games.  He saw an increase in targets in 5 less games, averages aside, he saw a significant increase in targets in his 2nd season, what he then did with those targets is actually irrelevant in this discussion. Puka seeing no increase is pointless, as he saw such an absurd amount of targets for a rookie, it's near impossible to see an increase. But the real issue in this post is that you think I'm proving your point by showing how Waddle had to share targets with Hill. Tyreek Hill was a 1st team All Pro who was 2nd in the NFL in yards that season. If you think Jaylen Waddle sharing targets with a 1st team All Pro and a future HOFer is even remotely in the same category as T-Mac needing to share targets with Coker... then you are certifiably insane, lol. If anything, you could make the argument that Coker is to Waddle as T-Mac is to Hill in that discussion (which would then lead to a serious increase in targets/yards for T-Mac).  But even that is insane, as neither T-Mac or Coker will be as good as Hill and Waddle respectively that season.  I love both of their potential, but c'mon now, T-Mac isn't getting 119 catches for 1,700 yards and Coker isn't getting 117 for 1,350 next season.
×
×
  • Create New...