MHS831

nice. But because that one time we drafted a 30-year old rookie QB we need to make a rule never to draft a QB over the age of 23.... Like I said, even at 26, he can play through 2 contracts and that is what Cam did--he is mature, a leader, and will not cost us a first rounder and a second (probably) to secure Levis or Richardson. It is hard to gauge talent at QB, so I never pretend to act like I know more than my plan. My plan would be to trade back in round 1, grab a TE and then grab Hooker in round 2.

He brought Tennessee to prominance--beat Bama. I hear, "system qb" -- they all are. If there was a system in which you can throw for nearly 40TDs and about 5 ints without needing intelligent processing and talent, then everyone would be running that system. If the system is really easy to run, then it is really easy to defend. Furthermore I see Stroud and Young going in the first 2 picks. So you are looking at giving up a first rounder and maybe a second for Levis or Richardson. Hooker is better than both. He will probably be drafted with pick #39 if we go that route, not #61 or whatever--to make sure we get him. At 26, he has 2 contracts in him, so what is the problem? How many did Cam have in him when we drafted him at 22 years of age?

2023 at that. We older folks need more than days--

So basically, Saturday is the big day. that is what the tea leaves are telling me.

Like I said, if one of the top 3 does not drop to us (4 if you like Johnston), I see us trading back. No real value at #9. I agree that we need edge--no doubt--but I also think a CB (remember the Bucs' game?) and a WR is a bigger need than I am hearing---still, CB is deep and a TE might make the WR need less severe.

Assuming we sign Carr or another starting QB and (since we have been looking at him a lot) draft Hooker in the second round (all the attention he has been getting might be a tell). I decided to get the focus off QB for at least one thread and take a look at what we could get in round In this scenario, I think we sit because non QBs are usually not worth the cost of moving up (the price to move up in the draft in the top 10 is rarely worth it because the QB market has inflated the costs): Agree, disagree (nicely--please don't hurt my feelings with your all-knowing, omnipotence that has no boundaries and separates you from mere mortals), or post your own "big board". These are MY preferences for non-QBs and the order in which I would take them at this time (I have accounted for off field baggage that is known, so this is not purely on talent, but I am not aware of any other Jalen Carter mishaps, so I give him a mulligan here): 1. Will Anderson Bama Edge (unlikely he will last past the top 5; paired with Burns, Oh my) 2. Jalen Carter, Georgia DT/DE (Here is where the experience and quality of the coaching staff pays off--even with his baggage--and I am not that familiar with the details--Carter could drop--to #9? Unlikely. An interior pass rusher from the 5 tech DE spot, he would be a beast, considering his size, athleticism, and length.) 3. Myles Murphy, Clemson, DT/DE (Will he be there at #9? Coin toss. He has scheme versatility and DL versatility, making him valuable. at 6' 5" and 275 lbs, his power and quickness are a problem for any OL and then, QB. He is developing, which means--with this coaching staff--he could become an elite player for a decade--like Jason Watts, for example--that good.) 4. Quentin Johnston, TCU WR (Too high? This WR is going to be special in the right system, but we have Moore and not a lot of star quality after that. Imagine Moore, Johnston on the outside with Marshall, Shenault, and Smith inside? Johnston is NFL ready and is a big target. Don't like Darnold's decision-making in the pocket? Well, what you can't see is WRs covered up--he would make Moore and whoever the QB is better. This would free up Moore, add an elite threat, and let Marshall, Shenault, and Smith work vs. lesser coverage. Win Win Win. 5. Bryan Branch, Bama, DB (This may surprise some of you--He could be there at #9; in today's NFL where they stay in nickel most of the time, a big nickel who can cover like an outside CB and tackle like a LB is a rare find--which is why you want him playing the slot inside, he is a sure tackler and a big DB who can stay with today's #2 WRs and athletic TEs. Heck, he can drop back and play S, or he can be moved outside in a pinch. This would definitely upgrade overachieving Hartsfield, who is great depth and special teams talent, but a liability at times. I love this player) 6. Christian Gonzales, Oregon, CB (The best CB in this draft, and a lock down CB. Imagine him across from Horn? Jackson as a third CB --since he can't stay healthy, it would limit his exposure-- with CJ Henderson as the fourth CB. While I am a bigger fan of building the Defensive front, especially since we are going to the 3-4 base, 2 shut down CBs makes sense because it makes the opposition beat you inside, behind the LBs and in front of the Safeties, with their TEs and slot WRs. Remember how bad the CB play was vs. Brady and the Bucs? Furthermore, cap wise-you would be able to pay Horn when his second contract is due because you lose the Donte Jackson contract. This is more of a "long term" play, I guess, but Gonzales would make our CBs the best in the NFL. To be honest, while I would understand this pick, I am not a fan of it because the Panthers could trade back and still get a premiere DB/CB--deep class). 7. Devin Witherspoon, Illinois, CB/Nickel (I love this DB because he can play inside (6' 2") and outside, but I think he is what the new NFL is looking for at nickel. He is a fierce tackler and makes very quick reads in the passing and run games. He plays with a chip, as if the oppositions' wearing of a different uniform offends him. 8. Michael Mayer, Notre Dame, TE (A good argument against this pick is that TE is deep and we might be able to trade back 4-5 spots and still grab Mayer. Good points. However, Mayer is a true TE--a good receiver and a good blocker--so in a way, it is like getting 2 players in one. I am not sure a more complete TE has come out in several years; there have been some that are more explosive in the passing game, but they disappear in the run game. He has three years of experience as a starter, so he is ready to play and would be an instant upgrade to the offense, making the QB better in the process by providing a weapon. A blocking TE who can reasonably be expected to go over 1000 yards as a receiver. Considering the Panthers' needs, I could see this happening at #9 or with a trade back.) 9. Tyree Wilson, Tex Tech, DL (Wilson can play effectively from the 5 to the 7 techniques. He is 6'5", 270 lbs. He is very powerful, but demonstrates some twitch. I am not as high on Wilson as some seem to be, but his versatility is noteworthy. He had an impressive 2022, with 7 sacks, 14 tackles for loss, and 61 tackles) 10. Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Ohio State WR (He had a great 2021, with 1600 yards and 9 TDs in Ohio State's high octane offense, but was injured in 2022, so who knows where he would be. Without the injury, Smith-Njigba could be the rated much higher, but he has good hands, decent size at 6' tall and 200 lbs. I have him at #10 on the non-QB draft board because we need a WR more than we realize it seems and he is the second best WR with an unknown upside. Gamble pick. Honorable Mention: Joey Porter, Penn St. CB (like the player, but 1 pick in 34 games?) Analysis: Unless Anderson, Carter, or Johnston is there at #9, or a QB to develop (Levis or Richardson), I think the Panthers should trade back. Lotta good DBs in the first round. I like Quentin Johnston if we have a QB in place--I think it would make the offense scary--add a TE in round 2.

If Corral is not ready until July, do you draft Hooker, who will not be ready until about October? I know he said, "long term" but that would be weird for OTAs and early camp.

If we sign Carr...

Around the 48:00 minute mark, Fitterer talks about getting a QB in round 1 or even 2, and then says something like, "if you see the guy you like, you go get him...if that does not work out, you grab that veteran." Here is what I heard: We like a player in this draft and we like Herndon. We are going to try to trade up and get the guy we want, and if we can't get high enough to get him, we will sign a veteran and maybe even trade back. With this in mind, we will try to offer the Bears a nice package to go get our guy. I think we will try to make this trade as soon as possible--maybe the end of March at the latest, after Free Agency. If we can't do that, we will sign a veteran QB and draft a QB in round 2 (Herndon, maybe"?) and maybe add some tools. Now, you have to really like the guy you are moving up to get---you are going "all in." I do not see us moving up for any QB other than Stroud or Young. I honestly think we will draft a QB on days 1 or 2. Stroud, young, or Herdon. Long shot: We sit at #9 and Richardson is there--we still need a veteran.

Was gauging his potential, not rewarding past performance on other teams. Did you compare their turnovers, or did we cherry pick a bit? Derek Carr 179 career turnovers in 142 games at an average of 1.26 turnovers per game Jacoby Brissett 53 career turnovers in 76 games at an average of 0.697 turnovers per game I mean, yeah, he has been given a long leash, if that was your point. And you must factor in the player you could add to the roster with the $15m you save--there are many ways to look at it.

Younger than Carr 61.1% career passer (64% most recent season with Cleveland). I think he might be a good addition...and cheaper than Carr. Of course, we still go after a QB, but this would open the door for projects like Levis, Richardson, or Herndon. I would not hate it.

If you want to know how brilliant this is, read the post that followed it. Uncanny jeanyus on this board. posted at the same time

I agree, but I have wondered if Young will drop due to his size--lots can happen, but I still think we'd have to be at #3 or #4 to get him. I am hoping Levis is not there when we pick, and I am thinking that only Richardson will be there.

Some of you act as if some young person is even in a position to consider the logical, long-term implications of playing football---you gotta look at the big picture. 1. Since Pee Wees, you have been elite--the talk of the town. It becomes your identity. Fans, girls, news articles, etc. It is addictive. 2. People are drawn to things they do well--the feed off the rush of being really good at something. You don't work that hard for that long and simply walk away from it. 4. You do not compare yourself to others--you really think you are elite. The elevator goes both ways--as you rise, you eliminate people along the way (competition). You don't think about the day you reach the point when you are not able to eliminate people because they are as good or better than you--you have never had that experience before. Eventually, all athletes die young. You do not think about that day. Like death, you know it is going to happen to you, but you do not think it is going to happen to you today. The arrogance of youth, the blindness of the moment. In your mind, you are invincible, immortal. It is the mindset of a gladiator, as someone else pointed out. 3. When I was being recruited by colleges, I had academic offers to go to college without having to play football. I remember telling my father (who played at South Carolina and in the CFL) "I don't want to turn 40 one day, look back, and regret not playing when I had the tools." (I did not think about turning 40, looking back and thinking, "Boy, that was dumb!") Funny, I used to think my life was football. Now I realize that it didn't start-couldn't start-until football was over. Life is so ironic.

Isn't dumbass two words? The fact that it is illustrates your point, and the fact that I had to ask means I am a dumbass too.

I used to get shots in a shoulder for an entire season in college, now 2 surgeries later, I have a pin in it and about 50% range of motion. It makes me grunt when I open and close the car door, which gets on my wife's nerves. I played 2 years in HS and 2 in college--and I am banged up as a result and to be honest, I was glad it was over when it ended--I cannot imagine what it is like to play 4 years in college and 10 in the NFL---those guys are paying for it later. I heard a trainer (in college) tell me that she was researching injuries--you are 10x more likely to suffer a severe injury in college than you were in HS, and 10x more likely to suffer a serious injury in the NFL compared to college. Not sure where she got the data, but it stayed with me.

When I think of Ebron, I think of a guy who drops easy passes when they are most needed....Maybe not fair, but I can't get that out of my head. What is he, about 30?

I have always said this, because we measure the wrong stuff. For example, a Safety has a 4.4 40 time but takes .43 seconds to read a play and begin reacting to it. Another player has a 4.6 40 time but reacts in .22 seconds. Who is faster? This does not take into account that the guy with the faster reaction time might also "gain speed" in terms of projected angles, calculated gambles, etc. In all likelihood, the first Safety is a first or second rounder. The second guy goes day 3.

Here is how I see it---draft players that are expensive--QBs, for example. In free agency, sign the players that are not that expensive. That way, at expensive positions you have a percentage of players on rookie deals, and you are not overpaying for veterans. If QBs are $40m and I can have one on the roster for an average of $8m over 5 years, then it is better than having a rookie TE for 5 years at an average salary of $7m when the TE vets make $12m.

OK, here is a list of my demands....

Exactly my sentiments. 27 years old--talented--should not cost too much.

People, the "plan" is not to do one thing--it is to examine your options. If you are closing your mind to a possibility while criticizing others for not sharing you're elite football acumen, then you are kinda coming off like a spoiled child. Just say you don't know and your skeptical--that is fine--but to act like people who think Hooker is a sure-fire bust and anyone who thinks differently is an idiot--I am not sure the effect you were hoping for is working to your advantage.

Every year there are players that scare me because I fear we will draft them. Levis is that guy this year--I would rather have AR. With Levis I see a nomad with a cardboard sign in his hand, standing at the intersection of Hope and Despair. (dramatic ending to my post)

I see what you are saying and you have a point, but you are saying it as if you know the answer and others don't--. Here is the other side of the coin you are flipping and screaming that you know it is going to land on your side-- You would get a mature QB who can develop for a season and compete for the starting job. Let's say his first contract covers years 26-29. You pay him a rookie contract during his prime. The average QB in the NFL lasts 4.4 years, so age is only a factor if he succeeds. If he does, you give him a second contract wherein he plays until he is 34. https://thesportsdaily.com/news/what-is-the-average-length-of-an-nfl-career-by-position/ Instead of paying some kid to learn to shave while he is on his rookie contract. I think maturity plays a role in the first round QB bust rate. Lotta pressure on a kid to come to city and turn them into a winner. As a second to third rounder to compete for the job, he is actually a good value with as much of a chance to start as anybody. As for the gimmick offense argument people are making--that is what they said about Auburn in 2010 or so. Hooker had no control over the offense, and all he did was excel. Look at the player instead. If you put Pat Mahomes in the Tennessee offense, would his stats have been better? In the past 2 seasons, Hooker stats: 58 TDs and 5 Ints. Averaging about 69%. He is 6-4 220--perfect size. Here is a pretty good assessment of Hooker: https://www.downtownrams.com/single-post/2023/02/18/hendon-hooker-nfl-draft-scouting-report-draft-profile/

Probably did not want to open the flood gates for the Newton Nut Huggers to start their "third coming of Cam" posts.