Sgt Schultz

I'm not going to join the hate parade on Ron. At least he has identified one of his major weaknesses. Most people don't ever do that. It took him forever, but at least he acknowledged it. Now whether he fixes the problem over the long-haul is another story. As for him starting Haskins, do we know for sure it was his decision, or was it Danny Boy's (who wanted him in the first place), or was it Ron's passive aggressive play against Danny Boy constantly asking "what about Haskins?" Snyder is great at saying his coach or GM in in charge of things, then essentially undermining them. That just seemed like a non-Rivera move, since Haskins was deep in his doghouse by then. Rivera is a lot like Fox. If your team is a mess, they can provide stability and get you to mediocrity, better on good years. The problem is the very things that allow them to establish stability from a fiasco also prevents them from taking a team to the next level. But, if you are the Foreskins or Broncos after McDaniels, stability looks pretty darned good.

Bum Phillips said it best. He described both Don Shula and Bear Bryant this way. "He can take his'n and beat your'n and take your'n and beat his'n."

The problem (in addition to our QB depth chart being as thin as a coat of paint) is Grier has not demonstrated he can move up the depth chart. He started at #3, we purged everyone above him, and he was still #3. Nor does he offer anything else. If he can't at least become #2 on the depth chart, we'd be better off trying to make a #3 QB out of Charlton than keeping him. About the only thing he has going for him right now is he is cheap, but so are the other options. Then consider that almost any team that gets to their 3rd QB is toast. The ones that aren’t toast are in a world or hurt or have defenses so good that their offense is almost optional, anyway. Because of that, if your #3 QB can do anything else (RB, TE, WR, LT, P, trainer) their value on the roster is higher.

I think Cleveland used to spray the dirt green for much of the season. You'd see players picking themselves up with grass stains that were too big to be from grass. I'm not sure what they used to "paint" the field, hopefully not a solvent-based product but it was Cleveland!

In his defense on retaining Rivera and Hurney, he probably had some questions about how much of the buffoonery was them vs. his predecessor as an owner. Rivera is not nearly the chameleon Hurney is, so it became obvious what he ceiling was fairly quickly. I'm sure Hurney could say "yessir, you sure are a genius sir. I've always thought the same thing.....did you want sugar in that, sir?" with the best of them, although one would think Tepper has seen that out of people before.

And on the subject of financing, SoFi (Rams, Chargers) was also privately funded. So while StubHub went away, SoFi replaced it. I was surprised Kroenke didn't fleece the taxpayers for more than just tax breaks out of that deal (he's not my favorite person). Privately funded with the NFL doing some of the funding. I think the tab for SoFi ran about twice the original estimate.

This stuff is pretty easy to find. About 3 minutes worth of a search finds that Metlife, StubHub (Chargers), and Gillette were all 100% privately funded. Levi's Stadium (49ers) was 88% privately funded. BofA was 77% privately funded. FedEx and Mercedes-Benz were both about 70% or more privately funded. Even the Jerry's Excess Palace in Arlington, TX was roughly 2/3rds privately funded. I don't like the idea of governments funding these things at all. The economics never work out the way teams and politicians advertise they will. And when they don't work out, they don't miss on the side of the taxpayers. But let's do some due diligence before we make claims that are so easy to disprove that even a caveman can do it.

Our QB depth chart defies the very definition of depth chart. Granted, most teams are screwed if their starting QB goes down these days, but, we take that to an extreme.

I also like the name "Stone" for an offensive lineman (Stone Forsythe, Seattle's 6th round pick).

I was thinking as I read the responses that he was clearly the "biggest" steal of the draft. And biggest of any draft since 1985 gave the world Refrigerator Perry.

Giving up his 8th year of eligibility> Does that equate to this:

I hope he does the number proud. It's been a few years since we had a CB that played like a mad dog.

I'm excited for anybody who can get the TE noticed on game day. I had hopes for Thomas, and he did nothing to justify that hope. Count me in the group that believes that lack of presence hurt our red zone and third down conversion results.

I don't do it just because a post says something I disagree with. Opinions vary. I don't do it when I think somebody has just made a fool out of themselves. That happens to everybody at one time or another. But there is a special brand of foolishness that is worthy. And you are right, it is rather therapeutic!

I've crapped on one post in the time I've been on this forum until today. I've given two posts in this thread the dung. It's not even worth going into the flaws in the OP. People have already hit on them. All we need is Linville to give the OP a lesson in the opportunity cost of Fields vs. Darnold and Horn, because that is what it is. Even then, he probably does not think we need a secondary, probably don't need an OL, we only need a QB that he wants. Guess what: they didn't draft who I would have grabbed in the first or second rounds, either. I liked Fields, and with Sewell off the board I would have been okay with it. He would not have been my pick (most likely Slater), and I initially scratched my head at Horn. But, I read their reasoning and get it. They had their draft board, assessed the values of each player, and went with their research. Not one guy's research, the collective work of several people who have some idea of what they are doing. I'll roll with it. If you (generic you) are so bound up on YOUR view of what the team should have done that your shorts are this much in a bunch over it, move on. Sports is entertainment. If it gets you that wound up, find another form of entertainment that doesn't. Life is too short. Otherwise, does anybody know the record for most piles of poo in one OP? This has to be on the short list.

Other than the last sentence, it sounds like Brett Favre. And no, I am not predicting Favre's level of success for Darnold. I am also hoping Darnold does not have Favre's penchant for boneheaded throws in big games. Somewhere in the middle of the good and bad would be a pretty good settling point.

Power rankings at this point are pretty useless. I don't give them much credence once the season starts until six or so games in. I'm sure some computer whiz-bang and stats maven could come up with a system based on numerical ratings or each player in the league, track the comings and goings, and come up with a power rating based on the current roster at any given time. Problem is, even that would be speculative since the player ratings would be based on last year or some guess about how rookies will perform. All I know is that computer whiz-bang and stats maven will not include me! It is interesting for conversation, though.

Let's give SCP the clap!

I was not happy about that move, either, but I followed my own advice and looked at the draft as a whole, once it was done. This is an outrage. We never had that sort of drama when Hurney was making the picks. After the first round, everybody was in an uproar. Sort of like Philly these days, apparently.

Roseman sort of has 8 x 10 glossies on Lurie over the Chip Kelley hostile takeover. How far that gets him remains to be seen. In some ways, it is almost like the Hurney to Gettleman to Hurney musical chairs, only the owner who thinks he has egg on his face is still in place. Thankfully, not here.

I completely agree. What this draft showed me is the Panthers organization has added a dimension to their thinking we have not seen before. Most fans, and our organization historically, have seen the draft choice as two-dimensional. The first is whether somebody should be on the chart, the second is their ranking/priority against everybody else on the chart. We have added the dimension of their value relative to where we are picking. So, as our picks approached, they looked at who was next our chart and what he was worth. If he was not worth the pick we were going to use, we were not going to fire away (or worse, trade up to get him before someone else swoops in, as somebody infamous in these parts would have done). We will (and did) trade down to either have our pick mesh with our valuation of the prospect, or trade down further, potentially miss out on our next guy, and pick up the chart after him somewhere. That's how you enter a draft with 7 picks, wind up with 11 players out of it, and don't have people wondering what you were thinking by drafting a prospect well ahead of where they seemed to be worth. The Dolphins played this game before the draft, assessing their board and trying to figure out how to get positioned get one of their top two or three at a suitable value and pocket a bounty of other picks. On the opposite side, think of the Raiders picking Leatherwood at #17. I liked Leatherwood a lot coming into this draft.....in the second round. Not so much at #17. The Pats liked Jones enough to pick him at #15. Would they have taken him at #7, if that was the pick they had, or would they have pulled a Miami and traded down a few slots to get him at a more palatable price and pocket something else in the process? I don't know that the Panthers didn't have Slater or Fields on the draft board, but if they did, they didn't have them valued as highly as I did. That's fine since they are paying the tab, so to speak, and have forgotten more about this stuff than I will ever know. Then add to the fact that a lot of people looked at the "Big Four" and maybe Jones as one pool. I've said this on other threads, but it is very likely that almost nobody was interested in all four/five of them. Most probably were interested in two or three, the only difference being who the two or three of the four or five were.

It is a little aggravating. I like to not murder the King's English, and sometimes I fail. By the time I get done scratching my head at what I said, it is too late. At first, I thought maybe it was linked to someone quoting the post, but then I realized I don't say anything important enough for anybody to quote.

You about gave me a heart attack, Mr. Scot. The mention of a name that was familiar brought to mind a certain person who seemed to have nine lives in the Panther organization.

Gawd, I'm old. I remember Joe Delaney and his death. The guy was a great player and left us as a hero, and that is not a word I throw around lightly.

Here's what I think it boils down to. We had a draft board of players we were interested in. As our pick neared, the next guy on the board was not worth the pick we had. So, we traded down. Maybe we lose the next guy or two or three, but in the end, we wind up not spending the #38 pick on a guy who is worth about the #52 pick. In the process, they got more picks. Maybe not prime picks, but picks they could make use of. That takes discipline. In the past, we would salivate over somebody who was a legitimate third round pick, get nervous that somebody was going to grab him before we did (aka overpay), and do something stupid. Personally, I would have grabbed Slater in the first, and if for some reason we didn't, hang with where we were and grab Eichenberg or Jenkins in the second. Guess what? They saw it differently than I did. The kicker: they have forgotten more about these guys than I will ever know, so I will have some faith in their judgement. It is their profession. If they ever start talking about aviation, I hope they call me because I guarantee, I have forgotten more than they will ever know. But in football talent assessment and "the plan," I owe them that same courtesy.