LinvilleGorge

Yeah, the difference in overall interest in college basketball now vs. in the '80s and '90s. is very palpable and it's honestly been trending this direction for 20 years.

When you look at our drafts over the past decade or so, it's no wonder why we're so bad.

We can use an infusion of talent everywhere. BPA every pick. If we have numerous players graded similarly and the phone is ringing, listen to the offers. We need talent everywhere, period.

March Madness is just so unpredictable. Anyone can go home any given night in a single elimination basketball tournament. All it takes is having an off night against a hot shooting team and that's all she wrote.

More attempts downfield. More completions downfield. When we have multiple games where our starter attempted zero (0) the overall number of attempts in that game is a lot less relevant. Bryce just didn't really go down the field much for whatever reason.

It's the only other measuring stick we have available. I'm not saying it was a great game. I've never said it was a great game. I've always simply said that it was the only game all year when we had a viable vertical threat in our offense.

I'm not talking about the game as a whole. I'm specifically talking about the downfield element. Given the way our offense played the rest of the year, that game was The Greatest Show on Turf in comparison. Sad as that may be. There were multiple games where Bryce didn't even attempt a pass over 20 yards and a LOT of games where he didn't complete one.

4/7 for a TD and 0 INTs when throwing for 20+ yards. Yeah, I imagine having a QB more capable of throwing the ball down the field would impact play calling. And yeah, Seattle had a weak secondary and that's why I personally wanted to see more from Dalton. Was our more effective downfield passing that day a fluke or was there something more to it? We never got the answer. According to the Next Gen Stats passing chart there were 4 attempts over 25 yards in that game. Dalton went 2/4 for a TD in those 4 attempts.

I think need has to be factored into picks in some regard. I mean, if your top prospects are similarly rated but there's one guy there at a position of much greater need obviously you should take that guy. What I'm saying is that with our roster makeup I really don't see where we have a position of such strength that it should negate taking the pure BPA.

I don't think it's that simple. Why was our downfield passing attack significantly improved with Dalton who had a lot less reps with the starters?

Me too. Honestly, I'm pretty much down for anything more than the late 3rd/early 4th equivalent that we'd get in the form of a comp pick, plus the freedom of not having to be concerned about protecting that comp pick with our FA moves. That's the other side of that coin. We'd basically have to handcuff ourselves in FA if we were relying on that high comp pick. That ain't good for a bad team.

It's not though. A receiver being open gives you a much wider margin of error. Those Bama boys were usually OPEN. Yeah, Bryce can throw deep in non-ideal situations if a guy is wide open and he can put a ball into a zip code. Can he do it when a guy is "NFL open" and he has to throw to a specific address? That's what I haven't seen.

I would too. I think paying Burns what he wants would be a big mistake but having him walk for a 3rd round comp pick would suck too. Tag and trade would be my preference.

I would absolutely give that lineup a look in camp. Icky can play LT in a power running scheme that largely leans on play action to setup the pass. Think Delhomme era John Fox offense. But I don't think Bryce can play in that style of offense. He's not comfortably turning his back to the LOS. I think Icky is an OG in an offense that Bryce can play in.

I didn't watch the above video but I'm not so sure there was something "off" with UNC basketball as much as it was simply that we went through a cold spell and had the misfortune of that cold spell coinciding with our opponents just shooting lights out. Sometimes that's just how basketball goes. If you're missing shots and your opponents are hitting shots it's tough to win games. The game can really just be that simple sometimes.

Yeah, Samuel is the type of receiver we should be looking for. We don't necessarily need great receivers, it's more about the TYPE of receiver IMO. We need YAC guys.

It's just different, man. If everyone could do the same things they did in college in the NFL then there would never be any busts outside of injuries and off field stuff. Projecting talent to the next level ain't easy. There are plenty of 4 and 5 star HS recruits who bust in the college game too.

We can honestly comfortably just draft BPA with every pick. We can use an infusion of talent everywhere.

So why isn't he? You can turn on the college tape of anyone drafted highly and find great highlights. They weren't highly drafted because they sucked in college. Honestly, you could say that for anyone drafted, period. You're talking about the cream of the crop of college talent.

I'm just saying there are reasons why there aren't any examples in the NFL and most of those reasons concern playing against NFL defenses. Yeah, the OL was trash. Yeah, the receivers were subpar. But when you play 16 games and a washed up journeyman of a backup has more downfield highlights in the same offense in one game than you did in 16... uh oh.

I didn't watch the college clip. Y'all gotta let that college tape go. There's 16 NFL games to go off of now and you got one throw to a wide ass open guy to lean on.

We'll add another addendum. If the guy is WIDE ASS OPEN. lol

That dude can play. Durability is a HUGE concern though.

You do have to get the ball there though. That was my point. For Bryce to generate depth in his throws he needs the perfect opportunity. Clean pocket to step into and through the throw. He needs 4-5 yards of clean grass in front of him after enough time for the WR to get deep. It just doesn't happen often in the NFL.

Yeah, if you have Cam or Luke traits you're crazy not to go show them off. A lot is made of Luke's intelligence but I think a lot of folks forget that he was an ELITE athlete. If you send coaches into a room to build a prototype NFL MLB, out walks Luke Kuechly.