If the Panthers land Stafford, it is win now, not rebuild

[BurnNChinn]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

David Tepper has been preaching patience, long-term thinking, five year plan, etc.

If he turns around and goes into "win now" mode in year two after a five win season, I'm gonna be kinda disappointed, honestly.

Well he changed that when they went after Teddy with that contract. But the way this team played last year with a terrible qb, we could of easily win 4 or 5 games at least. Don’t see why they can’t be win now mode.

[Growl]

5 minutes ago, SOJA said:

if we draft Mac fuging Jones at 8 I'm out 

I didn't say mac Jones, I said QB #5, which is still very fluid now between him and Lance

The QB orderings right now are entirely media fabrications, and a raw fcs player who played one average game this season and won't get a combine is especially vulnerable to the head coach treatment that comes when coaching staffs start to get involved in the scouting process at the end of the season

There isnt a conventional range system with QBs, either a guy is a 1st round guy and you take him or he isn't, and it very much looks like 5 is the magic number

 

 

 

 

[BurnNChinn]

11 minutes ago, Monrowed said:

The fans that want to win now and desire instant gratification were the children that failed the marshmallow test.

Sir ur a moron, we would have won at least 9 games last year with Stafford. Count getting a winner at qb when game is on the line and a healthy CMC. This team would be a playoff team next year.

[BurnNChinn]

Just now, Growl said:

I didn't say mac Jones, I said QB #5, which is still very fluid now between him and Lance

The QB orderings right now are entirely media fabrications, and a raw fcs player who played one average game this season and won't get a combine is especially vulnerable to the head coach treatment that comes when coaching staffs start to get involved in the scouting process at the end of the season

There isnt a conventional range system with QBs, either a guy is a 1st round guy and you take him or he isn't, and it very much looks like 5 is the magic number

 

 

 

 

Hell no I will wait and draft Newman. Jones will not be a good nfl qb count it

[MHS831]

According to a report this morning, the Lions want a first rounder.  I think we should give them a second rounder this season and the 2022 first rounder.  That is the equivalent of two second rounders in trade value. The Lions already have #7, so they have the position to get their QB in this draft.

Then we should trade this year's #8 back for a 2021 second rounder for a 2022 first rounder.  If you average all picks and take the mean, that gives the Panthers 840 points of value for 1400 points--a good deal for a team moving up, so they could get more, depending on the team.  So we end up with Stafford, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6.  (If the comp info is correct).  We get back the #1 in 2022. 

 Yes, we are building for the future, but who said you could not start that process with a 33-year old QB on a 4-year deal?  That gives the Panthers 3 seasons or so to find the next QB.  We could make trades for future draft picks (let's say in 2023) and build the collateral we need to move up for a young QB.  Let him sit behind Stafford for a year or two, and transition into the starting role. 

I know this may sound caustic, critical, or cruel, but it is not:  We brought in Cam when we were rubuilding, and it took Cam 4-5 years to get us to the Super Bowl.  During that time, he took a beating, and instead of basking in the long term success of having an elite, long-term QB right now, we did not have the pieces built around him--he held the ball because WRs were big and slow and not open, he ran the ball more than he should have and he was sacked trying to make plays.  Our OL was questionable most of the time, but because Cam was such a great athlete, we did not prioritize protecting him.  So how many healthy years did we get out of Cam?  6, if you include his rookie season, when he was learning.  He was hurt in Carolina 3 seasons.  A third of the time here.

So bringing in a QB who can lead a young team is not a negative. Cap room is the best argument for not doing so, fwiw, but it can work. 

 

                           

[Moo Daeng]

12 minutes ago, Growl said:

the odds that four QBs go before 8 is borderline absurd, it's the absolute nuclear scenario, and in which case I'm pretty content to take guy #5 in what is apparently an even better class than we think, or laterally just take Sewell/top pass rusher and whatever it

We'd have our choice of incredibly good prospects.

[Growl]

2 minutes ago, BurnNChinn said:

Hell no I will wait and draft Newman. Jones will not be a good nfl qb count it

oh I get it, Newman is that guy you read about in the mock drafts

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, BurnNChinn said:

Well he changed that when they went after Teddy with that contract. But the way this team played last year with a terrible qb, we could of easily win 4 or 5 games at least. Don’t see why they can’t be win now mode.

That was one guy being in "win now" mode, or rather "save my ass" mode.

Look what it got us.

[Monrowed]

5 minutes ago, BurnNChinn said:

Sir ur a moron, we would have won at least 9 games last year with Stafford. Count getting a winner at qb when game is on the line and a healthy CMC. This team would be a playoff team next year.

I take it that you failed the test. You have my condolences.

 

[BurnNChinn]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

That was one guy being in "win now" mode, or rather "save my ass" mode.

Look what it got us.

Yeah well good luck getting a qb at 8, and we’re not starting Teddy again that experiment is over.

[MHS831]

2 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

We'd have our choice of incredibly good prospects.

We would, and It is hardly absurd to think 4 QBs could go before us if you consider the fact that there are so many teams in need of a QB and those that do not might trade back. 

Jacksonville--Lawrence

Jets--Wilson is a reasonable projection, or a trade for a team who wants Wilson. Are they serious about staying with Darnold for another season?  If so, they could stay put and take Sewell.

Dolphins--I think they stay with Tua, but they will be approached by teams for a trade, so someone at #3 will take a QB or Sewell if the Jets don't.  However, Tua is LEFT HANDED, so is the LT that valuable if the stay with Tua? They will probably trade the pick--to a team looking for Sewell or a QB.

Falcons--I am not 100% sold on the Falcons taking a QB here--about 60% sure they will.  What rookie is going to be better than Ryan, and why waste a #4 overall to sit behind Ryan for a year or two?  You build the defense in Atlanta, and I see a top CB or pass rusher here.  Do they pass on Fields here?  I think cooler, smarter heads will prevail and they will build the defense and OL before bringing in a rookie QB.  Ryan has an expensive contract to break--so they need to think it through.  A new QB is likely to bust without a D and OL and the WR issues they might face. So they will assume #4 is a rare opportunity to take the QB of the future.  I think Fields is the pick, but do not be surprised if they do not.

Bengals--Another team that could trade back if Sewell is gone. 

Eagles--a Wild Card.  Are the committed to building around Wentz?  New coach--like Jets, Falcons, etc.  I think they are committed to Wentz / Hurts and will draft differently--they will get offers for a trade.

Detroit--I think the Lions want a #1 for Stafford so they can move up with the Jets or Dolphins to draft a QB. 

So, it is not unreasonable to see a scenario like this:

1. Jax Lawrence

2. Lions (trade with Jets) Wilson

3. Dolphins Sewell OT

4. Falcons Fields

5. Bengals Chase WR

6. Eagles Smith WR

7. Jets Lance QB

So it is not absurd--even if you only involve the teams picking in the top 7.  The top 4 QBs will draw interest from about 15 NFL teams that need a QB. 

Although historically 4 QBs have not gone nearly that high, I would not call it absurd.

I think we should sit tight and take the BPA.

[Mr. Scot]

35 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

According to a report this morning, the Lions want a first rounder. 

They'll get one, and quite possibly more.

Rapoport said at least a third of the league has already called the Lions about Stafford.

I don't know that they'll get it from us, but that's a seller's market.

[TheMaulClaw]

4 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

Two players does not a defense make.  They are rebuilding whether they want to admit it or not.

We gave Tampa the blueprint to deal with GB. Our defense is fine and will only get better. 

[Growl]

44 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

According to a report this morning, the Lions want a first rounder.  I think we should give them a second rounder this season and the 2022 first rounder.  That is the equivalent of two second rounders in trade value. The Lions already have #7, so they have the position to get their QB in this draft.

Then we should trade this year's #8 back for a 2021 second rounder for a 2022 first rounder.  If you average all picks and take the mean, that gives the Panthers 840 points of value for 1400 points--a good deal for a team moving up, so they could get more, depending on the team.  So we end up with Stafford, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6.  (If the comp info is correct).  We get back the #1 in 2022. 

 Yes, we are building for the future, but who said you could not start that process with a 33-year old QB on a 4-year deal?  That gives the Panthers 3 seasons or so to find the next QB.  We could make trades for future draft picks (let's say in 2023) and build the collateral we need to move up for a young QB.  Let him sit behind Stafford for a year or two, and transition into the starting role. 

I know this may sound caustic, critical, or cruel, but it is not:  We brought in Cam when we were rubuilding, and it took Cam 4-5 years to get us to the Super Bowl.  During that time, he took a beating, and instead of basking in the long term success of having an elite, long-term QB right now, we did not have the pieces built around him--he held the ball because WRs were big and slow and not open, he ran the ball more than he should have and he was sacked trying to make plays.  Our OL was questionable most of the time, but because Cam was such a great athlete, we did not prioritize protecting him.  So how many healthy years did we get out of Cam?  6, if you include his rookie season, when he was learning.  He was hurt in Carolina 3 seasons.  A third of the time here.

So bringing in a QB who can lead a young team is not a negative. Cap room is the best argument for not doing so, fwiw, but it can work. 

 

                           

this is just the worst possible scenario

You're giving up draft capital you could've just used to go get a franchise QB, and to make up for it, you're giving up an all pro caliber prospect

in turn you're getting a window player, while sacrificing your most immediate means of reinforcing said window

and worst of all, I do think it's what the team is planning