mav1234

Why do you think one of these QBs would have more questions than Corral? Where are you drawing that line? Corral had a bad injury and we have no idea how he's going to progress. He had terrible coaching but looked absolutely atrocious. Not all on him, but also certainly nothing to look forward to next year. If I was a GM, I wouldn't even consider him in any roster-building outside of potential depth - if he proves he can be a backup, awesome. If he somehow is more than that, amazing, but that's a very steep hill to climb.

I don't think there's anyone wanting a QB in the first round that wants them to reach for like the 5th QB on the board if we're drafting 9th or something. But what we need is a new QB, and while it is possible to get them in the 2nd or 3rd, it is way more rare.

Every year next year's QBs are much better. We're very likely to be drafting top 10 and may have an opportunity for a very good QB prospect. I've no interest in tanking but also think we really need to add a QB.

there are a couple of posters (check out the gameday thread) that believe pretty strongly that we shouldn't draft a QB etc and build around Darnold, and the OP has basically said similar things.

Good for Darnold but he still isn't the answer. Darnold hasn't lost us a game yet this year, so that's great. He was pretty good last week. But we also don't win games because of him, but because our offense minimizes the reliance on him. But this thread... Man, realistically the dude may be a backup for us but he isn't gonna lead this team to a Superbowl. 5 years and 50+ games into his NFL career he gets a single game with some kind of top rating in some weird stats category and that's what you hang your hat on?

What Reich got out of a 39 year old Rivers, Wentz, and Brisset was really incredible. Better seasons by each of them (arguably Bridgewater was similar to Brisset tbf) than any Panthers QB since 2015...

They lost in the divisional round to KC that year, you are right

RIP Harris. Incredible play... I wonder how many flags would have been thrown on that play in today's NFL, between the hit on the receiver and the celebrations in the end zone...

I understand your take - I also understand why the Panthers might not see things similarly. They could easily view the Rams picks as not being very early firsts in the future... The Rams this year are bad, yes, but they've demonstrated the ability to bounce back EXTREMELY quick, and I really don't expect the catastrophic breakdown over multiple years as some folks here. They have a lot of key pieces on IR now too, who will be back next year. They may be losing their best player on D, but they still have a lot of pieces, including on that side of the ball. RE: McVay retiring, he mentioned Stafford, Kupp, and Ramsay as well as AD, so I don't think that he is retiring at the end of the year. edit: It's actually possible AD comes back next year from what I'm reading, too...

McVay is potentially retiring? I didn't hear that. Definitely a stupid trade not to make in that case.

Not disagreeing, but it is all based on that draft value charge that circulates. Not all orgs do things identically but supposedly most halve the value of a pick's draft value every year (which effectively moves it down one round for anything but very high 1st rounders), and for unknown future first rounders, they typically assume it will be some place in the middle of the round (makes sense tbh).

The argument is each year in the future the value of a draft pick declines by round (when talking about negotiations around trades). That is, a first in one year is a second, a first in two years is a third.

We will see - they (the Rams) are an unorthodox organization for sure. They haven't had a losing season since 2017 (obviously before this one), and they went 4-12 and bounced back to win 11 games the next. I could see similar, despite their lack of draft capital, because they are extremely well coached. We'll see I do believe if somehow it had been 2 firsts this year instead of down the line, they make that trade.

I think this is just the way front offices value draft picks - I think it's a mix of over-valuing him and viewing the draft picks differently than fans for a variety of reasons (unknown future draft position of the other org, unknown needs, unknown if the staff will even be there in 3 years...). I also think there was more about CMC than what we know RE: why he was traded - I suspect he made it clear he'd like to be. Also given injury history, age, and position, Burns definitely is more valuable.

I agree, but the team viewed this trade (as teams do - not saying it is how fans should) as two seconds and a third. That is a realistic target to hit or exceed I think.

I agree on the offensive minded coach, but I'm less sure what we have behind Moore I think. You may be right tho. TEs would be huge, though. Whomever our next QB will be will really benefit from a couple pass catchers at that position...

Yeah... Outside of the OL, we basically have almost nothing on offense... It's rough. I like DJ and think with a better QB he'll be even better, but it's rough with him seeming to be our only consistent threat. But we do have a good OL, and a bunch of good D pieces, so we're basically in a situation where if we are smart and lucky this off-season, I think we could turn it around... We will see tho. Hard to know what to expect with the coaching search. I understand the desire for the higher draft pick but I think this division is too shitty and this team is overall too good (relatively speaking) for that level of tanking. Of course if we'd kept Rhule we'd be in contention for the first overall pick, I think, lol.

I know for most of us this season feels over but it isn't for the team at any level. They're not going to announce Wilks has lost support of the organization right now. We aren't THAT dysfunctional...

Well that looks more like the Baker I remember so... fondly...

Wilks had the perfect opportunity to near lock up the job yesterday - make some half time adjustments and come out and flip the game. Take the NFC South lead. He didn't. He will surely still get an interview but he doesn't seem the right person to turn this team truly around.

Wow, controlling our own destiny in December, what more could you ask for in a football season?!

That I agree with - my post wasn't about one game but the wider context is all, but may not have been clear. Sorry if that was confusing - that's why I asked if you thought they were tanking. It's hard / impossible to truly tank in the NFL intentionally, but at least having a bad coaching staff gets you part way there

In that case I agree with him, haha. Oh by no means do I think Wilks is exceptional as... Well anything... I do not want him back. In the wider scheme of the year I think it's blind to say the team isn't playing harder for him than Rhule but that's all relative. And it doesn't matter if Wilks is better than Rhule. We need more than that. I do think the players kept fighting but I personally think yesterday was less about their own personal motivation and more being outschemed and outmuscled. They got shoved around and outplayed. We made no adjustments. It was like a Rivera team all over again. The inspired word choice was about why the team wasn't going to just give up and/or tank either.

I don't have any clue what you are saying. You asked if I thought the team looked inspired when I was using the word to explain why they weren't going to deliberately tank. I do think that the hope of the playoffs has inspired a change in the team compared to when Rhule was in charge, it doesn't mean the team played "an inspired" game or something.

So you think yesterday was deliberately tanking? Or are you just upset with a particular word choice? It's pretty clear to me they aren't tanking and haven't quit, and still believe they have a shot at the playoffs. Your opinion may differ.