Christensen ...

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

No one knows how the draft falls in reality.  They didn’t have Fields, Lance, Jones, etc anywhere on their board.  Even as trade down options if there per the guys you said cleared all that up.  

It sure looks like they simply removed all QBs from the board and discussion after they gave up picks for Sam and knew they were going to have to pay to get Teddy out.  Which isn’t really about not liking a draft prospect at all. 

 

 

I just think it's a really, REALLY bad move to pass on a guy you had valued as a franchise QB because you made a trade for Sam Darnold. I don't have much faith in this staff figuring it out at the NFL level if that's what we did. 

[CRA]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Nah, I think the Terrace Marshall pick would've been Kellen Mond or Davis Mills instead.

and that would go with my theory of the guy who has never won building a team around QB play….just doesn’t value it the way you have to in the NFL.  
 
A Phil Snow D paired with meh QB play isn’t how you win in the NFL.  But that been the Rhule model for success.   His first two years sure seem to be following that. 

[ForJimmy]

34 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd put it this way...

If you are unsettled at the quarterback position (and yes, our quarterback position is unsettled until Darnold shows he's up to it) and a player that you consider elite, can't miss, franchise quality, insert your adjective here falls to you, there's no way in hell you pass that guy up.

Thus, the very least you can conclude from this is that the Panthers don't think any of those descriptors apply to Justin Fields.

They may think he's decent, they may think he's okay, they may think he's not good enough or whatever, but if they believed he was a franchise quarterback, he'd be a Panther right now.

Which tells me...they don't.

From what I gather they were worried about drafting a rookie QB in the first because of the low success rate (which is higher than reclamation projects but you know…).  I feel that found it less risky to trade the future 2nd and 4th on a young QB which potential that use a 1st on one. I mean our GM did say acquiring Darnold allows them to take the BPA, which (to me) implies they were looking at drafting for a need (which obviously was QB) before acquiring him. 
We more than likely think Horn is a better/more complete CB prospect than Fields (or even Darnold) is for a QB. That doesn’t mean we wouldn’t have still over drafted or reached for a QB to help address a need. Teams are desperate to have a guy at that QB spot. I mean he’ll look at what the Niners gave up for a D2 QB with potential…

[OldhamA]

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Nah, I think the Terrace Marshall pick would've been Kellen Mond or Davis Mills instead.

I'd be asking for a refund on my NFL Game Pass subscription, and I really like Rhule. 

[AU-panther]

29 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd put it this way...

If you are unsettled at the quarterback position (and yes, our quarterback position is unsettled until Darnold shows he's up to it) and a player that you consider elite, can't miss, franchise quality, insert your adjective here falls to you, there's no way in hell you pass that guy up.

Thus, the very least you can conclude from this is that the Panthers don't think any of those descriptors apply to Justin Fields.

They may think he's decent, they may think he's okay, they may think he's not good enough or whatever, but if they believed he was a franchise quarterback, he'd be a Panther right now.

Which tells me...they don't.

who said anything about can't miss?  Cam wasn't can't miss at 1.

bad argument, it actually supports what I'm saying.

They might have thought Fields and Darnold both had similar chances of being successful, neither were a 100%, QBs rarely are.

My point was that Darnold being on the roster has a clear effect on how you approach the draft.  Why are you going to waste the 8 pick on a guy that you might consider marginally better or worse or the same. 

If Darnold isn't on the roster then maybe you take the gamble.  Here again passing on Fields by itself doesn't tell you what they thought of Fields, it tells you what they thought of Fields relative to Darnold.  That's a totally different thing, but I understand that most people around here look at everything in a vacuum, which is rarely how things happen in the real world.

Passing on Fields when you have Darnold in itself doesn't tell you that they didn't like Fields, it tells you that they didn't like Fields more than Darnold to the point you were willing to give up taking another player at 8.  Its pretty simple logic but at this point I think I'm wasting my time trying to explain it.

 

 

 

 

[AU-panther]

6 minutes ago, CRA said:

No one knows how the draft falls in reality.  They didn’t have Fields, Lance, Jones, etc anywhere on their board.  Even as trade down options if there per the guys you said cleared all that up.  

It sure looks like they simply removed all QBs from the board and discussion after they gave up picks for Sam and knew they were going to have to pay to get Teddy out.  Which isn’t really about not liking a draft prospect at all.  Because you had highly regarded prospects for cheap at an assortment of different styles and fits.  

 

 

exactly, once you trade for Darnold your draft board changes.

 

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, CRA said:

and that would go with my theory of the guy who has never won building a team around QB play….just doesn’t value it the way you have to in the NFL.  
 
A Phil Snow D paired with meh QB play isn’t how you win in the NFL.  But that been the Rhule model for success.   His first two years sure seem to be following that. 

I just haven't seen this staff out the required urgency into finding a QB. They seem hellbent on trying to find a bargain at QB while building the rest of the roster. 

[CRA]

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

From what I gather they were worried about drafting a rookie QB in the first because of the low success rate (which is higher than reclamation projects but you know…).  I feel that found it less risky to trade the future 2nd and 4th on a young QB which potential that use a 1st on one. I mean our GM did say acquiring Darnold allows them to take the BPA, which (to me) implies they were looking at drafting for a need (which obviously was QB) before acquiring him. 
We more than likely think Horn is a better/more complete CB prospect than Fields (or even Darnold) is for a QB. That doesn’t mean we wouldn’t have still over drafted or reached for a QB to help address a need. Teams are desperate to have a guy at that QB spot. I mean he’ll look at what the Niners gave up for a D2 QB with potential…

the bust rate argument doesn’t really hold when they then go draft a DB at 8.  Bust rate for CBs is high….and is a much less impactful position. 

 

[ForJimmy]

20 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Honestly, yeah. I think we still take Horn.

I would be very surprised if we didn’t take a chance on Fields or Jones without Darnold. Mills or Mond are not guaranteed to be there next pick. That’s a risky gamble after pretty much kicking Teddy off the team. Maybe Teddy stays if we don’t acquire Darnold? Either way, it seemed Tepper was wanting a new QB.

[CRA]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I just haven't seen this staff out the required urgency into finding a QB. They seem hellbent on trying to find a bargain at QB while building the rest of the roster. 

coaches are super stubborn.  We should know that.   Rhule got to where he is today by doing X.  Seems like he thinks he can win here by continuing it.   And QB play has never been the focus for Rhule. 

 

 

[AU-panther]

15 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Nah, I think the Terrace Marshall pick would've been Kellen Mond or Davis Mills instead.

Maybe, but there was talk that we talked to Miami about going to 3 and you don't trade up to 3 for a non-QB.  Also you don't go to 3 hoping one of the top 2 QBs fall to you.  Regardless of what the Jets were saying everyone assumed QBs were going 1-2 in  the draft.

I think there is a very good chance we had 3 QBs we liked.

Also San Fran traded up to 3 at end of March.  We traded for Sam beginning of April.  Once San Fran went to 3 we pretty much knew best case we would end up with QB4 and even then that wasn't guaranteed.

 

 

[LinvilleGorge]

9 minutes ago, CRA said:

the bust rate argument doesn’t really hold when they then go draft a DB at 8.  Bust rate for CBs is high….and is a much less impactful position. 

 

The bust rate argument also doesn't hold up when you trade for an actual draft bust. The failure rate of bust reclamation projects is extremely high.

[Pup McBarky]

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I would be very surprised if we didn’t take a chance on Fields or Jones without Darnold.

Without acquiring Darnold, we likely trade up for the QB we actually wanted. Or we pick Horn and sign someone else. But we would not pick Fields or Jones at #8 even had we not had Darnold because if that was the case, we would've picked Fields or Jones anyway. That's the way it works. A lot of people questioned why pick Keuchly with Beason on the roster. You pick the guy you you think is worthy of the pick. Fields was not that guy.

That may turn out to be a bad decision, but they weren't letting him get away if they actually believed he had a good chance to become a Franchise QB.

[Basbear]

18 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

Hey what kind of a thread do you think this is?!

I nearly quoted your first try to destroy the thread, got plenty of non-vaccine bait...