jayboogieman

I didn't say new coaching, I said what should be better coaching. Even if the Panthers' coaches are bad, they shouldn't be worse than what Darnold had last year. Because if they are, the team has much bigger issues than picking a QB or not. As I stated in another reply, playing if never works well. I think the best option this year is to surround Darnold with talent and see what happens. If he sucks, he sucks and the team can pick another QB next year.

By going QB, the Panthers could be missing out on a possible franchise tackle, WR, or whatever else. Playing what if never works well. Lets just hope they make the best decision for the team no matter what it is.

The Panthers might. Won't know until he hits the field with the team. Unlike other positions, teams only play on QB at a time. So, yeah, you can have too many good ones on the roster. If they are good enough to start, they are going to want to play. It happens in college all the time now. It would be worse in the NFL where millions are on the line. Is it fair to judge the current FO by what previous regimes did?

I'm not all in on Sam, but think he should get a chance to show what he can do with what should be better coaching and surrounding talent.

Or Darnold is bad enough to lead the Panthers to another top ten or better pick next year while they used this year's draft to improve other areas of the team. Then they use next year's pick on a QB.

Person has started to make sense? I don't know how I feel about that.

The Falcons had a guy that played TE that won or helped them win a lot of games over the years. The Panthers have had a couple themselves. Then there was a guy in NE that helped win a ring or three. I'm not saying Pitts will be like those others, but he has a chance to be a game changer despite just being a TE.

A lot of guys that are for Fields will tell you that you can trade him for a pick or picks later on. Counter to that idea is that all picks are not equal. Just because the Panthers spend a top ten pick on a player doesn't mean they'll get the same or better value in return if said player is traded.

Never hurts to try once in a while.

A rocket scientist or brain surgeon are generally the smartest guys in their rooms. Would you want them giving you invest advice or doing each other's jobs? Just because you are smart doesn't mean you have the expertise to contribute to the process.

Going vet QB with a young and rebuilding team is a way to try and cut the rebuild short. That's the sort of thing Jordan used to do with the Bobcats/Hornets when he would get impatient. Trying to compete when the team isn't ready is never a good thing and leads to longer or more rebuilds and losing. Trading for Stafford wouldn't give me hope. Signing Teddy didn't give me hope. Trading for Watson and having to give up the biggest deal in NFL history wouldn't give me hope either. We've seen what happens when you have a franchise QB and not much else. It isn't pretty.

Fair enough

I don't like making multiple posts because it feels too much like spamming.

Jake was closer to winning a superbowl than Cam. I'm willing to take that for Darnold. Hopefully there won't be a bad kick and a Patriots victory again though. It was reported the Jets refused to negotiate until after the QB pro days. That doesn't mean the negotiations took weeks, it just means the Jets weren't ready to do business at that point.

This is how I feel about it. If you think Watson was a realistic plan A you are living in a fantasy world. You can't trade for someone that wasn't being offered for trade. Thanks to the legal mess, it doesn't appear as if we'll know how things would have turned out between the Texans and Watson. If/When they pick up Darnold's option, he won't be a one year rental. Completely forgot about them being interested in Haskins. Maybe we shouldn't trust them to pick a QB at all.

Did you say the same thing when the media was stating Tepper wanted Watson and would give anything for him? Or did you believe the reports/rumors? Are we sure what the staff thinks highly of Watson? All I ever saw was stuff about Tepper wanting him at any cost and guys here about to bust a nut just at the thought of Watson to the Panthers. Never saw anything about the staff and their thoughts on Watson. Which would make him the third best QB in the team's history. I don't know if you have the job or not. We might have to take this to

I've never said Darnold deserves a thing. I've just said he should get a fair chance before bringing in a replacement. Cam never had to prove he was the guy. They didn't make him compete for the starting job as a rookie even though Ron tried to play to the press that Anderson was competition. Cam was handed the job. If competition makes guys better, that is why you bring in another first rounder to compete. Why not? If the Panthers think he is the guy and is the pick, shouldn't you too? I know you're high on Fields. I think you're in competition to drive his fan bus. Counter to that is how the last two superbowl winning teams were built. The Chiefs and Bucs both built the team before bringing in the QB. It also seems the 49ers are going that route. It seems those winning franchises believe the QB is the cart and the team the horse. A lot of you guys are wanting to put the cart(QB) before the horse(team).

Same is true for QB and every other position. Would you and the others wanting Fields still want a first round QB if it was Jones being talked about as the pick instead? Cam never had to compete for his spot. It was handed to him day 1. How many first round QBs were taken after Cam to compete with him? How many second rounders? How many vets were brought in? None. People have even posted here that the Panthers were scared to do so. I don't have a problem with the unfairness of the NFL. I have a problem with drafting another young QB that highly when you just traded for one. Give the guy that is here as strong of a supporting cast as you can and coaching. Then see what he can do. If he fails to deliver, then replace him. It doesn't make sense to replace him before he even steps on the field. Most of those teams sucked with Cam. That's the point. It takes more than just a franchise QB. I also mentioned Foles, which you had as well, and as I stated, it could be argued Manning as well.

How many of you competition breeds competitiveness guys wanted the Panthers to draft first round QBs when Cam was here? That's just a line you guys are saying as an excuse to want a first round QB this year. That didn't workout too well for the Panthers when they had Cam Newton. Three winning seasons and one superbowl appearance that they lost. Kerry Collins was a franchise QB too. One winning season and one NFC championship game, which they lost, out of four. You may not be able to build an elite offense without a stud QB, but you can build a superbowl winning one as season by Difler's Ravens, Johnson's Bucs, and Foles' Eagles. Manning's Giants may fit this mold as well depending on how one feels about Eli.

You're contradicting yourself. Darnold can't prove he deserves anything if the whole concept of deserving anything is ridiculous. The thing is the coaches and GM may think Darnold is the guy and he should be given the chance to prove that to them. Did the Panthers ever bring anyone in to compete with Cam? Did the fans want Cam to compete for the starting job? The answer to both those questions is no. The same was true for Kerry Collins back when he was drafted. The same will be true if Fields or any other QB is drafted in the first round and that makes the trade for Darnold a waste.

Darnold is 23 and mostly just a kid still. He may not ever be more than he is now, but the way to find out is by giving him a fair chance. Give him better coaching and a better supporting cast than he had in New York. Having a first round QB looking over his shoulder would not be a fair chance. The pressure to start the rookie would be too great. The fans would be calling for the rookie to start the second he is drafted. Even if the coaches wanted to use Darnold, they would have Tepper's pressure to start the rookie too as he would want to see his new rookie out there. The only LTs that hit the market are those that are past their prime or not worth what they want to get paid. Having a franchise LT on a rookie contract with a fifth year option would be beneficial to the team as well.

Tepper has already shown he is willing to meddle with the football side with the Teddy and Watson situations. It's safe to say he would do the same with Fields if he really likes him despite what his football people say. Sure, a Thomas or Revis can't carry a team to a Superbowl alone. Neither can a QB. The Panthers had a franchise QB in Cam. How consistently did the Panthers compete with him? How many winning seasons did he lead them to? Being obsessed with one position is not a path to success. You can only field one QB and they generally take a while to develop. Constantly drafting, trading for, or signing QBs and not giving one time to develop until you find one that is an instant success is a recipe for failure because you are taking assists away that can be used to help increase the team's talent level as a whole.

This post reminds me of when the Hornets signed Big Al and cut short their rebuild a few years ago.

The objective should be acquiring the best talent they can, not adding more picks.