run-run-pass-punt

I love good defense as well, but it's almost been legislated out of the league. I hope we're able to field a balanced team. Maybe we get lucky and the o-line gels better than we're expecting. I was hoping for Sewell, but the Lions stomped all over that, lol. I'm all for taking the bpa as the draft unfolds and plugging holes as best as we're able.

No. The draft is always an unknown. So why would I be upset about something that could be either a positive or a negative? And the universe loves me, so good or bad for the Panthers, it's always good for me.

Well, I never tell anyone else what they (do or do not) know. If you know, you know. I don't know. So I'll wait and be surprised.

One circumstance is not necessarily the other. I'm only saying I don't know who Darnold will be in 2021. The unfolding is always a mysterious unknown.

We all exist as a sort of relationship rather than an independent entity, as the mind tends to assume. We know how Darnold played in New York, but part of his play was most certainly the circumstances around him. We don't know what he will or will not be here imho. New coaching, new roster, new outlook, etc. "The" Sam Darnold of New York effectively no longer exists.

I can't fault the concept of turning over all stones in the quest for a franchise QB. (Personally I don't want Fields.) But if we truly believe Darnold has the potential of being that piece, I think we're better served building around him and taking a developmental QB later. If we pick Fields though, I'll, of course, hope he's the truth.

You have to take risks to get what you want. Risks always involve the unknown. You gamble on the odds, making the best decisions you can. We had no franchise QB. So, what do you do? If you feel none that you're interested will fall to you in the draft and the one in the NFL (Watson) that you thought might be that answer ends up compromised, you've got to be creative and venture off the beaten path. Getting a QB from a historically dysfunctional organization with poor coaching that provided no protection for the young player - a player that has shown he has tools - while only spending modestly to acquire him is about the best you could hope for, given the overall set of circumstances. Of course he could flop. He may never develop. But what if he ***does***?!? There are sufficient reasons to believe that is a possibility. The risk to reward dynamics of the decision are sound imho.

As fun as the draft is, and I get it - it is for me too, I always find it funny how all fan-bases are so excited with all this new talent that will be flooding into their organization, when in reality, it's almost never that way in the end. Hope is intoxicating. Let's hope we have a special draft.

We really need a laugh pie-emoji.

Busts...busts everywhere. Your odds are slim. Granted you've got to have a player at the position, but looking at draft history doesn't inspire confidence in your chances. How many teams/fan-bases are going to be crushed once they see their "hope of the future" fail miserably on the field after this upcoming draft? All things considered, I think Darnold's potential upside is the better bet. Build the team around him, and if he fails, it's back to the drawing board.

Have you noticed the bust rate of NFL picks? It's a lottery, and even the "experts" are wrong all. the. time. Part of the reason I'm very happy to trade down if the option presents itself. You mitigate risk with more chances at hitting on the non-busts.

Yep, that's how I see it as well.

If a guy you think is a long-term franchise QB is there at your pick, you have to take him - especially if you are uncertain at the position. Having said that, I've warmed up to the potential in Darnold, and I'd rather build the o-line for whoever is under center. But if we took a QB and realize that Darnold is ultimately the better of the two, it's not lost value. Plenty of QB hungry teams to recover the worth of that pick.

If you have a good line...ALL your receivers are better. Please, I hope our FO gets this right. Construct that fortress at the point of attack, let Darnold be the best he can be, and address receiver later in addition to signing Moore long term.

This is what happens when you castrate defenses.

Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. Serendipity can be your friend at times. Everything you plan seems to work out wrong, only for things to turn out right. Let's hope this is such a case.

This - along with the mess in NY - is what gives me the most optimism for this trade. And he's still so young with plenty of room to develop in the right conditions. I'll, as always, remain hopeful.

We're going to get a great player, no doubt, but like Scot mentioned, I also want O-line...*ALL* the O-line.

Absolutely. There is a very clear hunger to see with this regime. They *want* to win, and they're aggressively pursuing all options. I'm excited *because* of their obvious passion!

Numbers can be deceptive sometimes, and player numbers are often a reflection, at least in part, of the quality of the surrounding team as much as the individual player. I care more about what my eyeballs tell me. Is he making good reads and throws? Is he moving with confidence and making quick decisions? I realize such things may feel too ethereal for some, but I care more about what I'm seeing than the cold numbers.

Sometimes diamonds covered in sh*t don't shine. They're imperceptible until washed off. Let's hope Darnold is such a gem.

I'm optimistic. To be fair, optimism is my default state most of the time, but my optimism in regards to the Panthers future is more rooted in Rhule and co. I really like their approach. Flexible and adaptable, always eager to learn and change in order to put the team in the best possible position - very dynamic from my perspective. I'm expecting good things over the next few seasons.

I didn't want Darnold, but... let's just. let. this. thing. play. out. Good or bad move, time will tell. As a fan, and person, I'm always optimistic. And if it's a negative, the dawn always follows the darkness, sooner or later. Be at peace.

I think it all depends on evaluation of the player(s) that are available there. That said, I prefer, given the team's actions thus far, that we build around a guy we, presumably, see as a possible answer at the position. If we don't adequately protect him (Darnold), the investment has been wasted because no proper evaluation can likely be made. In addition, the core of any good football team is built at its foundation - at the point of attack.

Well, I never wanted Darnold, but there are lots of elements that contribute to player performance (at any position). New environment often equates to a different player, for better or worse. The fan in me will hope it's the former.