They may not be thinking QB

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, philit99 said:

Exactly, how long has Baker been in the league?

Three years and the Browns have been much better than their recent history in all three.

[philit99]

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Three years and the Browns have been much better than their recent history in all three.

That’s not my argument, I am stating that it will take an additional 3 years with a young QB with high expectations. My God how many first round picks did Cleveland have before Baker? I am saying let’s shore up some obvious holes and deficiencies, then worry about a potential long term solution at QB.

[Sgt Schultz]

12 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The Browns are 10-4 this year and have an overall winning record with Mayfield and have won no less than 6 games with him in a season. In the 10 seasons prior to Mayfield they only accomplished 6+ wins once. I don't think the Mayfield/Browns example is the one you want to use.

The Browns are also pretty stout in the trenches on both sides of the ball.  Mayfield puts them over the top (finally).

The stout lines without Mayfield would have them as a mediocre team dreaming of eating at the adults table with the Steelers and Ravens in that division, but instead getting what is left.  Mayfield without the good OL would be fun to watch as they lose games.

You don't have to have a top five OL or QB to win consistently in the NFL (it helps), but you do have to have units that do not embarrass themselves. 

Not for nothing, but what was the first thing anybody noticed on the goal line fumble Saturday?  TB made a terrible decision to try and extend the ball on that play (I never like those moves against the interior of the defense).  But prior to that?  Our interior line got stood up, if not pushed back so there was no way the play was ever going to work.  When your OL can not win a battle on the opponent's 1 yard line, you have big problems.  Ours can not and that was known before "the play."  I said earlier in the season after some game that our most effective short-yardage play on third or fourth down was the fake punt.  There is a reason.

I knew we were in trouble when I saw the defensive alignment.  We have seen that all season. 

As for the Browns, I have not been able to say this since the Ravens were in Cleveland as the Browns, they are a pretty good team.

[pantherj]

There is certainly a possibility that having seen more of Bridgewater on this bad team the coaches had decided that they want to stick with him. There is some evidence for this idea, however slim it may be, given how Brady and Rhule have talked about TB. Brady used the F-word describing Teddy (franchise). Rhule pushes back big time if the media comes at Teddy too hard, and to the point of gushing over him and pointing out the teams deficiencies. Then there is the whopper contract that rumor has it was going to be more money but Teddy's agent didn't press for more, and this supersized Marty and the coaches. Teddy has created two 1,000 yard receivers, and our offense, however limited due to mediocre pass blocking, was looking potent when CMC was healthy. One could argue that Teddy is holding back on throwing deep because he isn't safe in the pocket and can't wait on long developing plays. The dink and dunk works in moving us into the redzone, and it prevents our weak o-line from giving up sacks. So we could certainly be rolling with Teddy long term. 

Personally I don't want to stick with Teddy long term. I can't, no matter how many drinks I have, envision Teddy leading us to a SB victory given the incredible amount of QB talent current in the league, and things are getting worse for us after each draft. Potential superstar QBs are pouring out of the draft and the lesser teams are loading up. If we stand pat with Teddy, then when these QBs hit their prime (Tua, Herbert, Burrow, Lawrence, Fields) we're not going to beat these teams, nor are we beating KC, not to mention Teddy versus the ageless Brees is not in our favor. We might have a top 5 pick, and this might be the last top 10 pick we have for a long time. Either we prepare for the future now, or Teddy will have a gloved iron grip over this team. I know Teddy can get us to 8-8ish with an improved roster. 8-8ish will trigger Rhule into "just a few more pieces needed" mode, and we'll be too low for top rated QBs anyway. The fan base will go into "one magic season" mode, where we're hoping somehow all the right pieces will fall into place and we'll have one of the top rosters in the NFL. A good example of a magic season is when the 49ers had a killer roster last season, and bullied a lot of teams and marched to the SB. But look at what happened the following season, 5-9 so far. It's over for the 49ers for the next several seasons. They have to build another mega talented team, and that takes a long time. What about KC? They'll be good so long as Mahomes is great. Big difference.

Draft a freaking QB. Cam is gone, and Teddy is not the answer to winning the SB. Do something about it. Top 5 pick. Make it happen.

 

[philit99]

Let me ask it this way, are you sure the once every ten years QB will be available at pick 4-8? If the QB you have rated to take is gone, do you gamble and draft a QB you believe could be that in time, or do you fill in a hole with starter quality elsewhere?

[Snake]

It's possible but not likely at our spot. I would think LT would might make us wait another year but that would be the only position. 

[mattnasty919]

Doesn't matter what hurney thinks now :D

[Sgt Schultz]

5 minutes ago, philit99 said:

Let me ask it this way, are you sure the once every ten years QB will be available at pick 4-8? If the QB you have rated to take is gone, do you gamble and draft a QB you believe could be that in time, or do you fill in a hole with starter quality elsewhere?

Me, from a high first round pick, if it is not THE QB we are drooling over, I want a player than can make an immediate impact somewhere.  He may have learning to do, he may not be All Pro in his first year, but I want him starting and removing my concern over that position for at least a while.

My confidence that whoever we pick at whatever position will be a good one has recently gone up exponentially.

[philit99]

3 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

Me, from a high first round pick, if it is not THE QB we are drooling over, I want a player than can make an immediate impact somewhere.  He may have learning to do, he may not be All Pro in his first year, but I want him starting and removing my concern over that position for at least a while.

My confidence that whoever we pick at whatever position will be a good one has recently gone up exponentially.

This is my take. I just do not think the next generational QB will be available to us at our spot, unless we trade up. However, we could get a great pick on the Oline or trade back and get a starting LB and draft capital. We are not that bad of a team honestly, just need a couple good pieces.

[LinvilleGorge]

28 minutes ago, philit99 said:

That’s not my argument, I am stating that it will take an additional 3 years with a young QB with high expectations. My God how many first round picks did Cleveland have before Baker? I am saying let’s shore up some obvious holes and deficiencies, then worry about a potential long term solution at QB.

If you need a QB you don't have the luxury of picking and choosing when you address it. You jump when you have the opportunity. You wanna be the Texans pre-Watson with a dominant D and good running game but trash at QB? And now they have their QB and they're still trash because they missed the window with their overall roster.

[Cary Kollins]

Not sure if it’s been listed but Tepper has some thoughts, from panthers.com today:

Q: Is identifying a quarterback for the future a priority for the next GM?

Tepper: "If we think there's somebody, we're going to go for what helps the team most of the time. If that's that position, we'll take it."

[Growl]

I can't be the only one whose noticed that the only argument the anti QB crowd can muster is the assertion that they're wiser and more patient than the rest of us

 

then we get to watch them error.exe as they try to juggle that Wisdom And Patience with the repeated assertion that we shouldn't draft a QB because they aren't PLUG AND PLAY

[MHS831]

11 hours ago, NavyVet said:

I got a feeling alot of you gonna be mad on draft day when the Panthers don't draft a QB. I for one won't be mad. The Panthers have other needs. Why waste a pick in the first round pick that's not gonna contribute next year. The Panthers have to many needs for that. Micah Parsons is exactly what this team needs. I want a fast physical defense and tough physical o-line. I am also frustrated with Teddy, but Ii can see tha long game with this team. It's not like there won't be other QB's in the college pipeline. The kid from Arizona St, Sam Howell(UNC) the kid who played behind Trevor Lawrence is a great prospect also. If they pick one I wouldn't mind the kid from Texas Elingher in the 3 or 4th round. We played most of the year without our best player. I think with slight improvments the Panthers could win 8-9 games next year.

While you got poo'ed, there is something to this.  However,  I do not see us neglecting to build the OL and defense--I think how we approach free agency--and where our draft pick will be--will tell us a lot about our strategy.

I disagree about Elingher or any plan to draft the top QB next year--I doubt we get closer than #4, if that is where we end up.  The play is to trade back in the first round, take a LT (Cosmi, for example, and Mac Jones).  The ILB we need, a player like Barron (Ohio State) is a good one.  Million ways to do this.

[Growl]

7 minutes ago, philit99 said:

This is my take. I just do not think the next generational QB will be available to us at our spot, unless we trade up. However, we could get a great pick on the Oline or trade back and get a starting LB and draft capital. We are not that bad of a team honestly, just need a couple good pieces.

A gENeRaTiOnal prospect? That's who you're waiting on?