kungfoodude

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.

Well, remember this is a hindsight discussion ultimately. Also, one we won't have complete answer on for a few seasons, even if Darnold is a bust in 2021. IMO, the picks involved in the Darnold trade are valid to use in the formula with Fields simply because they filled a hole he could have taken. Obviously we couldn't be sure that a QB would fall to us, especially him. But he ends up in the calculation because he did and we passed. I don't view the "trade Darnold after the draft" scenario as valid. It's both difficult to pull off and also makes the team look ridiculous. I think a more likely scenario would have been keeping Darnold and Fields to create a competition. Which, I would have been okay with that too. As I have stated multiple times, I value QB over CB fairly significantly.

That is your problem, you view any hint of reasonable doubt with hysteria. It's just plain weird. Especially when the Panthers fail much more than they succeed.

Remember YGM was fairly raw coming in. If anything he was being pressed into action more than he was ready for action last season. I have no issue seeing the productive vet start over the young guy. Like many said, we rotate guys and supposedly plan on being a fairly multiple front, so he will get some burn. Zero reason to panic on the DL. That unit is easily the most solid we have(famous last words in 2019).

The Stafford comparison is interesting. I would say unlike Darnold, Matt Stafford was actually good on a terrible franchise, even early on. Hell, look at his third season in the NFL. Then again, Darnold wasn't throwing to Megatron, either.

We can't say he's a flop yet. It's disappointing he hasn't ascended the depth chart but that could still happen prior to or during the season.

The formula would also include the extra draft capital spent on Darnold in the trade. Which, you could also argue a certain level of "pot commitment" based on that investment. The thing is, we don't know if that factored in or not. This is a pretty tight lipped group here, it seems. It's funny, they seem to say a lot without saying much at all.

No. Because if Darnold plays poorly, somehow Gase will be to blame. Wait until you see our player surfing, fake Panther fans start turning on the team if Darnold struggles. I mean, we were all here for last season right(obviously some weren't)? Remember the progression Teddy fervor in the preseason, to even more Teddy fervor in the first few games, to grumbling about Teddy, to the full roar of "GET RID OF THIS BUM"? I certainly do.

Are we finally going to get good TC coverage now that we are doing joint practices with Indy? I assume the Colts control the access there.