Can we take a moment and enjoy what having a competent GM looks like

[woahfraze]

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

[CPF4LIFE]

Competent? this guy was ready to give up a first for Matt Stafford, and i dont think you needed to give a up second for Darnold when nobody else wanted him. We are following in to the line of trying to convince ourselves that this is gonna be good and there is no indication it will and the Hurney haters are gonna back it anything this guy does. We are still in wait and see mode and im not moving off that. I dont think he will, but Darnold could very well end up being worse than teddy and it wont matter what you put around him.

[pantherclaw]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say it's still a while before we'll know that for certain, but I've been mostly good with what I've seen so far.

Biggest potential issue to this point has been how many guys we've signed that have injury concerns.

Every NFL player carries injury concerns. 

[hepcat]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd say it's still a while before we'll know that for certain, but I've been mostly good with what I've seen so far.

Biggest potential issue to this point has been how many guys we've signed that have injury concerns.

It could be that the only players willing to sign with a team as bad as the Panthers are guys with injury issues. 

[BrianS]

41 minutes ago, CPF4LIFE said:

 I dont think he will, but Darnold could very well end up being worse than teddy and it wont matter what you put around him.

There's a deep, secret part of me that hopes this is exactly what happens so that we can try to draft a QB next year.  I'm not proud of it. 

[Peon Awesome]

Definitely premature to be hailing praises over the Darnold trade. We could look back at the whole thing as a disaster, particularly if, say, Fields is there at 8 and he becomes a pro bowl caliber qb. Meanwhile Darnold statistically has been worse than Bridgewater. I know we all hope better weapons and coaching will make him look more competent but let's say he turns into at best, a comp for Teddy. We pick up his 5th year option to pay him nearly $20 million in 2022 and are in the same position we're in this year with Teddy: stuck with an overpaid qb that won't take us anywhere with a contract that is tough to move, and meanwhile we give up what could be a high 2nd round pick if he really does flame out.

Listen, I'm not saying that's going to happen and god willing I desperately hope it doesn't. But at minimum I'm acknowleging it's very much possible. And thus it's way too soon for this kind of thread.

[ClawOn]

14 minutes ago, BrianS said:

There's a deep, secret part of me that hopes this is exactly what happens so that we can try to draft a QB next year.  I'm not proud of it. 

I'm going to root for my team to win this season. I think it will make it more fun. To each their own. 

[Prowler2k18]

58 minutes ago, woahfraze said:

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

Because a) we’ll need time to evaluate if Darnold can truly be our answer at QB; and b) if he isn’t and flames out like Bridgewater, we’ll need a competent backup just in case we take a swing at a franchise QB in 2022 (Howell). And if we trade him, his cap hit is not cost prohibitive.

[CPsinceDay1]

Until the draftpick is called I'm holding out on any judgement...

 

[BPF]

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

All this said, I do think it's valid to take a moment and be happy that we're not being run by Marty Hurney anymore.

This 1000% I can't wait until the draft due to how much different the last one was and this could turn into something beautiful. The defense could be nasty, and depending on the line the offense can get some points. 

[woahfraze]

48 minutes ago, Prowler2k18 said:

Because a) we’ll need time to evaluate if Darnold can truly be our answer at QB; and b) if he isn’t and flames out like Bridgewater, we’ll need a competent backup just in case we take a swing at a franchise QB in 2022 (Howell). And if we trade him, his cap hit is not cost prohibitive.

"A" makes a bit of sense.  But if he's shown enough after Year 1 that you feel he could be the real deal even if you're not 100% sure, you can resign him.  So I don't understand why you wouldn't see what you have in him after this coming year before making that decision.

 "B" makes no sense.  If he flames out, he's not a competent backup.  And even if you want to argue that he's serviceable as a backup, $19MM is way too much to be paying a backup QB.  His cap hit absolutely would be prohibitive to trade because all of that amount is guaranteed, but that's a moot point.  Because if he flames out, no one is trading for him period even if his salary wasn't so high.

[Mistuh Jones]

You pick up the ext for trade value purposes if that's what happens. You'd give a pick for a guy that's on a contract other than just wait for him to get cut, right? 

[SetfreexX]

1 hour ago, woahfraze said:

I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself.  For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out?  This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in.  Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk.

Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not?  Why not wait until after next year to sign him to an extension if his play warrants it?  Are they worried that if he improves that they'll have an issue keeping him because the FA QB market is bonkers?  That's the only rationale for executing the 5th year option, but I'd still prefer not to risk that investment when it's more likely than not that Darnold won't prove to be worth that amount of money for next year.

I think the EXPECTATION to pick up the 5th year was floated out there by the media, but I haven't seen it made official, would be in the team's best interest to wait until the deadline May 3rd which is the Monday after the draft. 

This way if we draft a QB we can forgo his option, and if we don't we still have the option to not commit to it. I personally wouldn't commit either way because he's not getting market value money, and if he's gone in FA we sign or look to the draft. I'd rather keep that QB money low until we draft a guy, and just build the best total roster. (See SF / MIA, as recent examples of this) we can be bad until we're in position to get ''OUR" guy. Doesn't matter how much you want to win if you don't have the pieces, we had #3 locked up, we could have rested starters Weeks 16 & 17 -- the team did this to themselves. 

I understand the morale, but we saw PHI secure #6 Week 17 pulling Hurts. We see examples every year, and we also see it not work out so no matter what you do there's opportunity to fail. A lot of it is just getting lucky, see JAX as NYJ fell into enough wins to lose the #1 overall pick. 

[joemac]

2 hours ago, davos said:

Honestly, if the 2nd rounder was a 3rd, maybe there would’ve been a different reaction.

IMO one second rounder in the grand of scheme of things isn’t that crazy. And one sixth when we had three this year and that future 4th is indeed peanuts. I think we slightly overpaid but the QB market is definitely hiking their going rates.

Are you really that worried about a 2nd versus 3rd round draft pick next year?  Some of yall are WAYYYYYY too attached to draft picks.