Is Silver Platter Sam a viable backup QB for Panthers over the long term?

[kungfoodude]

2 hours ago, SCO96 said:

Teddy was signed for 3 seasons I believe. That contract was perfect in length because it would give you time to see if Teddy was the guy, or draft a successor if he wasn't.

Imagine if we had kept Teddy this season and not traded down in the draft. We would have had our choice of 6 left tackles and/or 3 interior lineman, including Creed Humphrey (the best center in the draft). It's very possible we could have easily walked away with 2 starters on the O-line  from the 2nd and 3rd rounds. 

Having another year in the system and a "healthier" CMC would have helped Teddy's performance. By year 3 I think we could have been a legitimate playoff threat with solid depth on both sides of the ball. 

Yep. It buys you time to build and find not only a QB but an OL. Teddy can make up for some of their deficiencies(and he did) but Darnold amplifies them. 

They got greedy and thought they were gonna win now. Guess who that sounds a lot like? Marty Hurney.

2 hours ago, Catsfan69 said:

If we are starting over at QB get someone at least  Steve Berlin level. 

Then draft one.

But Sam's going to be the Starter next year don't you think?

If they draft a guy he sits behind Sam.

Sam will likely never start another game here again. That experiment is so over that it should be a fireable offense to even out him in the game other than as a backup after the starter got injured. 

I think the staff also realizes that he will not play here anymore either. That's why they keep dumbing down the offense and trying to keep the ball out of his hands.

1 hour ago, AU-panther said:

 

So you are content with us being average for years to come.  We get a journeyman QB, make the rest of the team strong and we can go 9-8.  Maybe one year we win a few close games and go 11-6 and get in the playoffs and probably lose.  

Cleveland wasn't bad because they overdrafted QBs.  They were bad because they didn't draft QBs well.  They had a good line, one of the best LTs of all time, and it still didn't' matter.

Also teams don't for the most part don't maintain a level of winning.  Most teams have good yeasr and bad years.  

This isn't about tearing the team to the ground but instead finding a QB.  The teams that consistatnly win are those that have the best QB play.

You are overstating players wanting to leave, most players go where the dollars go, even if a few leave it doesn't matter if you find a QB.

An elite QB is worth more wins to your team then a hand full of any other players.  Its not even just about positional value, its also about avaiilbity.  I can replace a safety or WR in free agency.  Even if want to spend the money on a QB in free agency there is a very good chance you can't find one.

I'm not talking about spending a 1st round pick every year, since Cam how many QBs have we drafted in the 1st round? 2nd round?

I guess you and I just have different goals for the team.

You keep intersecting meaning in what I am saying. Point out where I said I am content being average "for years to come?" This is the same as me saying your point is that we need to be terrible for decades to get a QB in the draft. Neither of those is true so you need to stop interjecting the argument to want to argue against and just accept what I am saying in the literal sense.

That's why I am pointing out the dangers of doing what you are talking about. I am not making definitive statements about it. Maybe we stink for a year or two and end up with the next Peyton Manning. Or maybe we stink for 15-20 years trying to find the next Peyton Manning. That's what I am saying, the teams that are constantly drafting high typically stay in those cycles for a long time. The reason being exactly what I am talking about. Mismanagement, poor evalutions, panic drafting and poor coaching. Any or all of those can keep you in a rut for decades.

Sure, most teams don't maintain a lengthy period of high level of competitiveness, that is absolutely true. But would you rather be the Pats, Chiefs, Packers, Colts, Seahawks, Steelers or do you want to be the Falcons, Texans, Vikings, etc. Do you just want to be able to randomly put together a few great seasons or be in contention for the long haul? I thought that was literally the point of this rebuild. The former teams that I mentioned have rarely experienced "bad" seasons. They have mostly been average to elite. That isn't my accident.

I would never in a million years argue against the value of an elite QB. Never. In fact I am on record here as repeatedly saying that it is the most important piece of a successful modern NFL team. By a wide margin. But, this acknowledgement doesn't mean that I want us to just draft a top 5 QB of every draft class. Look back 20 years and you are gonna find some amazing years for that and then a lot of really awful years for that. 

That's basically my entire point and why I keep beating on the evaluation and not reaching. If you don't believe he IS The Guy, then don't waste valuable draft capital on a guy that MIGHT be The Guy. 

After all, that is basically how we ended up with Sam Darnold. 

[Catsfan69]

2 hours ago, CRA said:

why would any NFL team go into week 1 next year with Sam Darnold as your starter?  

 

 

Because I doubt they Start rookie if they draft one and we have to pay him anyway????

[CRA]

43 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Because I doubt they Start rookie if they draft one and we have to pay him anyway????

You can’t  trot Sam out on the field week 1.  Well, not if you plan on having fans at BOA next season.  
 

 

[AU-panther]

5 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

Yep. It buys you time to build and find not only a QB but an OL. Teddy can make up for some of their deficiencies(and he did) but Darnold amplifies them. 

They got greedy and thought they were gonna win now. Guess who that sounds a lot like? Marty Hurney.

Sam will likely never start another game here again. That experiment is so over that it should be a fireable offense to even out him in the game other than as a backup after the starter got injured. 

I think the staff also realizes that he will not play here anymore either. That's why they keep dumbing down the offense and trying to keep the ball out of his hands.

You keep intersecting meaning in what I am saying. Point out where I said I am content being average "for years to come?" This is the same as me saying your point is that we need to be terrible for decades to get a QB in the draft. Neither of those is true so you need to stop interjecting the argument to want to argue against and just accept what I am saying in the literal sense.

That's why I am pointing out the dangers of doing what you are talking about. I am not making definitive statements about it. Maybe we stink for a year or two and end up with the next Peyton Manning. Or maybe we stink for 15-20 years trying to find the next Peyton Manning. That's what I am saying, the teams that are constantly drafting high typically stay in those cycles for a long time. The reason being exactly what I am talking about. Mismanagement, poor evalutions, panic drafting and poor coaching. Any or all of those can keep you in a rut for decades.

Sure, most teams don't maintain a lengthy period of high level of competitiveness, that is absolutely true. But would you rather be the Pats, Chiefs, Packers, Colts, Seahawks, Steelers or do you want to be the Falcons, Texans, Vikings, etc. Do you just want to be able to randomly put together a few great seasons or be in contention for the long haul? I thought that was literally the point of this rebuild. The former teams that I mentioned have rarely experienced "bad" seasons. They have mostly been average to elite. That isn't my accident.

I would never in a million years argue against the value of an elite QB. Never. In fact I am on record here as repeatedly saying that it is the most important piece of a successful modern NFL team. By a wide margin. But, this acknowledgement doesn't mean that I want us to just draft a top 5 QB of every draft class. Look back 20 years and you are gonna find some amazing years for that and then a lot of really awful years for that. 

That's basically my entire point and why I keep beating on the evaluation and not reaching. If you don't believe he IS The Guy, then don't waste valuable draft capital on a guy that MIGHT be The Guy. 

After all, that is basically how we ended up with Sam Darnold. 

Pats, Chiefs, Packers, Colts, Seashawks, Steelers were all pretty much built on QBs that they drafted.  They were consistently good because of the QB.  The league is full of good rosters with bad QBs that consistently are average to below average teams.

You keep on with drafting a guy that you believe IS the guy.  Outside of the rare time you have the 1st overall pick and manning or Luck is there that doesn't happen.

People thought Rodgers MIGHT be the guy, that is why he fell.

People thought Mahomes MIGHT be the guy, that is why he fell.  He was the 3rd QB in a class that had Trubisky at the top.  

Nobody even thought Brady MIGHT be the guy.

Pretty much nobody thought Wilson MIGHT be the guy.

Everybody did think Manning IS the guy, hence the reason he went #1.

We actually ended up with Sam Darnold because we were scared to draft someone who MIGHT be the guy because we only wanted to draft a guy that we knew IS the guy.

My only point is if you wait for the guy you are 100% sure about it will probably never happen.

Here again, agree to disagree, I like most of your post and we agree on a lot and both saw this coming.

 

[kungfoodude]

4 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

Pats, Chiefs, Packers, Colts, Seashawks, Steelers were all pretty much built on QBs that they drafted.  They were consistently good because of the QB.  The league is full of good rosters with bad QBs that consistently are average to below average teams.

You keep on with drafting a guy that you believe IS the guy.  Outside of the rare time you have the 1st overall pick and manning or Luck is there that doesn't happen.

People thought Rodgers MIGHT be the guy, that is why he fell.

People thought Mahomes MIGHT be the guy, that is why he fell.  He was the 3rd QB in a class that had Trubisky at the top.  

Nobody even thought Brady MIGHT be the guy.

Pretty much nobody thought Wilson MIGHT be the guy.

Everybody did think Manning IS the guy, hence the reason he went #1.

We actually ended up with Sam Darnold because we were scared to draft someone who MIGHT be the guy because we only wanted to draft a guy that we knew IS the guy.

My only point is if you wait for the guy you are 100% sure about it will probably never happen.

Here again, agree to disagree, I like most of your post and we agree on a lot and both saw this coming.

 

Yeah, I think there are levels of it. I am not talking about absolute certainty. I just mean someone you truly believe is going to be the answer. If you don't believe that, don't take him. If you don't have a first round grade on him, don't take him in the 1st. 

That kind of poo. That is really where we differ. I am not talking sure thing, I mean someone you BELIEVE in.

Which, we have to be careful that Rhule doesn't talk himself into a bum. It has happened twice already.

[AU-panther]

6 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, I think there are levels of it. I am not talking about absolute certainty. I just mean someone you truly believe is going to be the answer. If you don't believe that, don't take him. If you don't have a first round grade on him, don't take him in the 1st. 

That kind of poo. That is really where we differ. I am not talking sure thing, I mean someone you BELIEVE in.

Which, we have to be careful that Rhule doesn't talk himself into a bum. It has happened twice already.

We might have backed ourselves into a corner, I could really see it happening, and like you I don't want to invest in a bum. 

People just need to realize that QBs aren't even money bets.  They are always a worse gamble than other positions but the payoff is a so much higher, and frankly its a payoff that you pretty much have to have to be an upper tier team.

Gambling on a QB in 2021 on paper made more sense in 2022.  I really don't know what kind of class is coming in 2023.  That might be the wise move, I just seriously doubt anyone has the patience for that.

I think this season is so much more frustrating for fans because a lot of us saw this coming.

 

 

[kungfoodude]

44 minutes ago, AU-panther said:

We might have backed ourselves into a corner, I could really see it happening, and like you I don't want to invest in a bum. 

People just need to realize that QBs aren't even money bets.  They are always a worse gamble than other positions but the payoff is a so much higher, and frankly its a payoff that you pretty much have to have to be an upper tier team.

Gambling on a QB in 2021 on paper made more sense in 2022.  I really don't know what kind of class is coming in 2023.  That might be the wise move, I just seriously doubt anyone has the patience for that.

I think this season is so much more frustrating for fans because a lot of us saw this coming.

 

 

Yeah, this was largely predictable. That does make it so much more upsetting to see it go the way we thought it was going to go.