kungfoodude

Yeah and the Ravens obviously weren't that sold on him either, right? Otherwise you take him at 25th. That's a reasonable gamble, not being all in on a player as a franchise QB. Hence why I said what I said, if you are really sold on a guy, you take him at 6. If you aren't, you trade down and just let the chips fall where they may. IMO, trading down isn't about getting the guy they want, it's about getting more draft picks(for them to fug up) and/or just taking a QB from those available because you view them about the same.

It isn't about absolutes, it's about a classic Panthers flaw from the past few years which is ignoring strong classes of specific positions and just attempting to go against the grain for no obvious reason. I don't know what is wrong with our overall decision making but we just cannot wrap our heads around this concept as a franchise.

But are you also blind to his(Howell) faults as a result? You did get blinded by Herbert's offense when he was at Oregon. Regardless, the point being is that if you look at this QB class, prospect by prospect, it is just bad. Doesn't mean 1 or 2 guys might not succeed. Pickett might be able to outplay his Andy Dalton-ish ceiling. Willis might be a fast learner and figure out how to anticipate throws, read defenses, etc. Corrall might end up learning to read the field pre-snap like Drew Brees and carve up defenses with that quick release. Ridder may somehow fix his myriad of mechanical issues and be the same gamer he was in college. Howell might end up not being a poor man's Baker Mayfield and be what Mayfield was supposed to be. Strong might develop into a guy that can be extremely adept at moving in the pocket and analyzing defenses at an elite level. But....if you take the past few classes and sit down with the pros and cons of each of the top 5 or 6 prospects, it's clear that this isn't just a "doesn't have a top tier prospect" class but it's a class that lacks many decent gambles on success. It's a lot of traits and flaws for prospects that we typically are used to seeing in guys that go in the 4th-7th rounds. So are we looking at Mahomes or are we looking for Gardner Minshew? I am gonna say this definitely leans towards the latter.

And also....Tua just wasn't as good of a prospect. Additionally, Herbert wasn't a failure of the NFL, it was a failure of your evaluation. The system you play in college matters to an extent, but you need to be looking for NFL traits and the ability to pick up offensive concepts. Even we as amateur evaluators can handle some of the first portion of that. The rest is hard to glean without interviewing him and also without years of experience playing and/or coaching football. I will point out that it is odd that you hated Herbert for the offense he played in but it's very similar to what Howell played in at UNC. What is the disconnect?

A bit below average? This post isn't going to age well.

The NFL whiffed on the 6th overall pick? That is an odd way to say one team whiffed on a pick. One team amongst the worst 6 teams.

The weaknesses in the OT's pale in comparison to the weaknesses in the QB's. Of the guys that could even have reasonable hope of potentially being successful(Pickett, Willis, Corral) the path to get their either has a pretty limited ceiling or a LOT of development needed. Versus the OT's which largely need refinement or bulking up(Cross specifically). This isn't really even a fair discussion when you compare the top 6 at each of these positions. The QB class is just SAS. The DE class is leaps and bounds better than this QB class through 6 players, for that matter.

This will be another Herbert moment for you. Literally watch BC play.

It actually does add up. You aren't using the right math.

That is the thing, if you have a QB you really think is the guy, take him at 6. If you are after a QB and you are trading down into the mid to late 1st to grab him, you obviously aren't sold on him either. And I am saying this as a guy that is low on this entire class.

Or an elite DE, for that matter. I think the thing that most people who love Fitterer so much conveniently forget this is Tepper and Rhule's hand picked guy. Ya'll remember the decisions these dopes have been making, right?

We will inevitably fug this up. I suspect if this happens it will be the start of the opinions turning against Fitterer in larger numbers.

It is probably hard to find a worse predictor of success than PFF college ratings. Hence why their NFL draft big boards are usually so unbelievably bad.

He isn't one of the top 8 OT's in this class. likely lower than that. If they believe he is the long term answer at LT, all the more reason to get rid of those people.

Well, if you don't just take one of those top DE's or LT's.....that's just dumb.

I think that is why guys like Ekwonu and Penning stand out specifically to me. They just have that personality that they are going to try and destroy you every play.

This is just basically posturing and dick measuring. I suspect this will all get worked out eventually.

Not sure you are getting what I meant.

Johnny Manziel didn't save Mike Pettine's job.

Yeah, the Rhule thing has soured me pretty badly.

No, I do understand that. The mobile QB's are much a spectrum than just "running QB" and "statue." Hence why I kept saying athletic or athlete. A guy like Mahomes or Russell Wilson are very good, very mobile QB's but their biggest weapons are their arms. And that is basically what I mean. In the NFL, it is way more difficult to find a home in the league if you aren't an athletic QB. The college game figures this out first and now the NFL is following suit. Doesn't mean you HAVE to be a great or good athlete to succeed but more often than not, the guys that stick around the league now are or were good athletes(with some decline due to age for some of them). Lamar is also a bad example of a guy who can throw because he not only has a good career completion percentage but a low Int Rate, as well. He's a very good thrower, but it gets overshadowed by what he does with his legs.

Brett Favre is a pretty bad example by accuracy standards. He's basically a backup by today's @ standard

Fine but you are quite literally ignoring that the NFL examples referenced don't have major accuracy issues. Running QB's that can't hit the broadside of a barn(The Golden Calf of Bristol for example) don't survive long in the NFL.

The difference is that being an athlete is almost a requirement now, because of the factors you and I have mentioned. The idea that running QB's don't have value or aren't successful is as ridiculous as saying the QB position hasn't changed dramatically because of the increased athletic ability of the average NFL QB. The game changed and being athletic was a part of that.

People just aren't accepting of the fact that the expectations of QB's changing. Being an athlete and being able to be a threat with your legs adds to the effectiveness of your throwing. It's an extra element that stresses a defense. Hence why it is valued even beyond a "running QB."