kungfoodude

Not to mention the lack of thorough TC coverage. I hope this eventually goes away and we allow more coverage of the team again.

Yeah, it just kind of seems like your criteria is rather subjective. Not sure I would generally agree but it's hard to refute your opinion when there isn't much to actually refute. Agree to disagree on some of it.

I mean....did you see the other guys we signed in the offseason??

Drafting a LS with a stellar one on the team is just light speed stupid. I mean, anyone with any sense knew it was dumb. Doesn't really matter if the replacement 6th rounder worked out or not. That is a UDFA signing.

Yeah, fans being overly negative or overly delusional is as old as the Huddle itself. Been that way in my 12 years here, for sure.

I don't think you understood my post. I am talking about early Stafford versus early Darnold. Calvin Johnson has been retired since 2016, unless you were unaware of that.

I guess he has made a couple of bad snaps already in practice. You gotta remember JJ has been bulletproof for almost a decade. That was why I think most were extremely surprised by the pick.

Yeah. If he is Jets Darnold our floor could potentially be pretty low. That could be top 5 status in the draft material.

Wonder if Bynes makes Perryman expendable?

https://theathletic.com/2763207/2021/08/11/ranking-the-panthers-rookies-from-day-1-starter-jaycee-horn-to-the-ones-with-work-to-do/ I won't post the camp write ups because I don't want to blast paid content(which you should subscribe to, BTW) but they had them: Immediate Impact 1. Horn 2. Marshall 3. Nixon Showing Flashes 4. Smith 5. Taylor 6. Christensen 7. Tremble 8. Hubbard Work to Do 9. Brown 10. Fletcher 11. Hoskins

I can definitely see a scenario where both or one is better than us. They are still both very talented teams. I am not gonna sweat that this year, but if they happen to be better than us and win less than 10 games, I think that may mean we are finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. Especially with New Orleans. Here is the thing, though. I definitely don't want to see New Orleans be TOO bad. The ideal situation for us is that they languish in the 6-9 win range for a long enough time that they can Payton. The last thing we need is for them to snag a hotshot top 8 draft pick QB. Atlanta is gonna be Atlanta. Capable of ripping off 12 wins and capable of 3 wins. The best part is that if the Taysom The Golden Calf of Bristol/Jameis Winston experiment fails, we can probably start helping keep New Orleans down for the next few years while we ascend the NFC South ranks. Even better news? Tom Brady isn't immortal, no matter what he thinks. Even that little stunt down in Tampa is coming to an end sooner rather than later.

Has Slye ever made one in the NFL?

I would disagree about the DL. I think the depth did improve from last season. I could see a scenario where we struggle with run defense. It did seem like the focus was on pass rush in the offseason, so perhaps we aren't stellar in that regard.

Well they aren't exactly predicting they are going to be stellar. A game above or below .500, essentially. Given their overall roster talent, that is low.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/fpi/_/view/projections/season/2021 We come in 22nd in their preseason Football Power Index rankings. Projected W/L: 7.8 - 9.2 Playoff Percentage: 28.7% Divisional Title: 9.0% Make Divisional Final: 12.0% Make Conference Final: 4.4% Make Super Bowl: 1.7% Win Super Bowl: 0.5% Interesting how tightly packed they have the non-Tampa Bay portion of the NFC South. In their model they don't predict a lot of separation. I will admit, I could stomach a 7-8 win season a lot more if our divisional rivals are languishing in the bottom half of the league too. We keep predicting a fall back to earth for the Saints. I'd love to see it finally happen and the Falcons misery continue.

Yeah, it will be interesting to see it play out. I'd like to see him be our first ballot guy but I supposed if he isn't, we know Peppers will be.

I agree. Hands down the greatest returner in NFL history.

Yeah but what do you mean "become a legit NFL end?" That seems pretty subjective. By that definition, why wouldn't being a full time starter in year two be a "legit NFL end?" I am not preaching anti-patience. I was just confused why you used Hardy as an example as not being...."legit" until year three. The biggest thing that changed in year 3 was double digit sacks production. I agree, most rookies aren't going to be impact players initially. Sometimes starting as a rookie may even say more about your team than the player. Look at Troy Pride Jr. He probably had no business getting the PT he did but our secondary was pretty thin. So, even then there is a little nuance to each situation. I don't think there are hard rules about which position will mature at what rate.

I think it is what, 5 modern era guys per year? Is that right?

Yeah but that is an entirely different discussion than what you seemed to be saying initially. The "guys ahead of him" argument. That was why I countered like that. If it comes down to predicting what the voters do, I mean, who knows? I think we can have a discussion on the simple merits of his accomplishments versus his peers, though. I just think the arguments for him statistically and in terms of accolades are stronger than those against him.

You literally cannot follow the discussion at all. I see why you answer the way you do, because you get lost in the weeds without seeing what the actual discussion is even about. We are taking about a future scenario of Darnold+Horn versus Fields plus what it cost to get Darnold. The entire point of that discussion is the "what if" scenario for their FUTURE. Literally read back through our discussion and see how quickly you derail it by not being able to hold a coherent thought process. I said I wanted OL and not Fields. Oh yeah, show me where I said that. By all means, show me the post where I made that statement. Also, look at the title of this thread. You sure we didn't take OL in the first three rounds?

But he is better than the others being considered. More yardage than Wayne, Johnson, Bolden and Holt. The least receptions if the five. Only 1 receiving TD behind Boldin and Wayne. He was the last WR to get the triple crown. Tied for the most All Pro selections in the group and 3rd in Pro Bowl selections(2 behind the leader). This is without mentioning his 6 career return TD's. To me, it's easily Smitty in that group. The only way he is out is if they value SB rings more than those stats.

Hardy really took a season. He started 16 games his second year. If you only mean double digit sack production, then yes. But even the elite guys rarely get double digit sacks as a rookie.

You have such an illogical discussion style. Is Trey Lance a waste for the 49ers? Was Aaron Rodgers a waste for the Packers? Do you care about "waste" when you have an answer at a critical position? I am genuinely perplexed by this idea of "waste." So do you consider quality depth "waste?" Is YGM "waste" because he doesn't start? Terrace Marshall? I consider a "waste" a pick like Greg Little. He was a waste for obvious reasons. Also, the "#1 defensive player in the draft" is what he was drafted. We have zero idea if that will be the actual case. Could be Horn is a bust, could be Fields is a bust, could be Darnold continues to be a bust, could be Sewell is a bust, etc, etc. We have no idea about any of then, other than Darnold. I think this is basically where you are failing in following the logic, there are other scenarios that may play out other than the ones in your mind. Hence why I am saying that Darnold+Horn will be compared to players we passed on at 8 and the draft capital we gave up. It's not a spectacularly difficult to follow. What we got versus what we gave up. Simple as that, really. My question would be, why would you exclude any of those factors? Give me your ultimate reasoning.