It’s time to do this the right way

[Pimpdaddy]

...there's been a lot of issues to digest over the last couple days... folks laying out their hopes and dreams of the different scenarios that will play out in the future for our success...we could do this right...if, if we had a competent owner... after I watched the tipper press conference I realized the fans and the Panthers are at the bottom of the list in priorities... soccer and music was used to indicate successes of his in CLT....hes a hostile prick trying to wing success in his little playground called the Panthers... we're gonna be bitching about him 5 years from now... your gut should tell you the Panthers seem destined for bottom feeders....our hope is we stumble on a coach, gm and qb to make us competitive again.

[WUnderhill]

18 hours ago, Navy_football said:

My man, I didn't even respond to you... my only point is you don't tank for a #1 QB. Build your team and culture first. That #1 QB pick crap is over freaking rated. You don't bring a 22 year old into a crap show and expect him to be your savior. I showed how it doesn't make your TEAM better. And yes, it matters if the QB won with the team that picked him vs some other team. Why in the He11 would we pick a SB winning QB for somebody else and claim that as a win? It actually shows that a strong TEAM brought in a free agent QB (that happened to be a top pick) and won a SB. If you build a good TEAM, then you can pick a QB at an average of 28 and still win a super bowl. It ain't that hard to understand unless you refuse to accept facts. 

 

You are presenting it as if it is EITHER you get the #1 pick, OR you build a team/culture, etc. So you aren’t even arguing my point you are just arguing against some made up point that nobody is talking about. Nobody is saying we want the #1 pick and nothing else. I 100% agree I don’t want to draft a franchise QB and ruin him or fail to reach his potential because we put a shitty team and organization around him. So what are you even arguing? You’ve made up something in your head where you can’t get the number 1 pick and also do other things, I really don’t even know. I presented a scenario where we increase our draft capital, because that’s important for TEAM building. You consistently fail to acknowledge that one of my original points was you DON’T ask coaches and players to lose, and that we’re a bad team that needs to evaluate our roster and get players on film for our future coach(es). How do you think coaches coming in are going to evaluate say Brandon Smith heading into next years draft with no game film besides pre season and not having been with him in practice? How will they know for sure our level of need at that position? What about Cade Mays or Amare Barno? It’s just dumb in a failed non-playoff season to not get our young draft picks playing time. You build a winning culture by CONSISTENTLY winning. Do you think winning 4 or 5 games this season builds a winning culture that much more than winning 1-3 games? This is a serious question because that seems to be the argument you’re making. Run CMAC into the ground another year, don’t get trade value out of him, play only starters, in the name of winning 4-5 games. Do you really think that builds a winning culture? Or do you still think we’re a playoff team somehow, because I just don’t see it.

And yes, it’s stupid to start bringing in which team the #1 pick played for in the context of the discussion that was being had. You of course conveniently fail to consider what the team who traded the #1 pick got in compensation in your analysis of the pick’s value to a franchise. It just introduces extra variables that have to be considered but doesn’t even really matter to the point that was being made previously.

Edited October 13, 2022 by WUnderhill

[WUnderhill]

18 hours ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

Point made, now tell me who is a surefire HOF QB in the 2023 or 2024.  Each one of those names minus Stafford are headed to the HOF one day.  

You can't keep losing to get the top QB in the draft.  It's a crapshoot.  You have to do your homework and hopefully nail a good QB.  Outside of the Mannings and Stafford the QBs you listed weren't top 5 picks. 

A good head coach is going to sit down with the GM, like Payton did in New Orleans, and go the best route available for a QB.  While our next head coach may not hit a home run like New Orleans did with Brees.  The next head coach may find that alternative piece until a permanent solution can be found.  Carolina did a good job finding Delhomme.  He had a great run with us and outside of Cam's years probably the most exciting QB we've ever had.  Plus, he took us to the Super Bowl. 

I wish I knew to your first point. I absolutely acknowledge that there is some luck to sucking bad enough in the RIGHT year. I don’t know if this is the right year. And I don’t propose to lose every year, but we just fired our HC after 5 games and are 1-4 starting PJ Walker at QB, this year is lost. I DON’T want to watch another losing season next year, so the point is to accept where we are at right now and make the most of it. Short term pain, long term gain. 
 

The top 2 guys both certainly seem to have their question marks. That’s part of the reason I think they need to spend as much time and money this year as possible on scouting, and also as much time and money as possible on developing Matt Corral. If there isn’t a guy they feel is worth it, then maybe they can trade down and get more picks or future picks. 

[Navy_football]

30 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

You are presenting it as if it is EITHER you get the #1 pick, OR you build a team/culture, etc. So you aren’t even arguing my point you are just arguing against some made up point that nobody is talking about. Nobody is saying we want the #1 pick and nothing else. I 100% agree I don’t want to draft a franchise QB and ruin him or fail to reach his potential because we put a shitty team and organization around him. So what are you even arguing? You’ve made up something in your head where you can’t get the number 1 pick and also do other things, I really don’t even know. I presented a scenario where we increase our draft capital, because that’s important for TEAM building. You consistently fail to acknowledge that one of my original points was you DON’T ask coaches and players to lose, and that we’re a bad team that needs to evaluate our roster and get players on film for our future coach(es). How do you think coaches coming in are going to evaluate say Brandon Smith heading into next years draft with no game film besides pre season and not having been with him in practice? How will they know for sure our level of need at that position? What about Cade Mays or Amare Barno? It’s just dumb in a failed non-playoff season to not get our young draft picks playing time. You build a winning culture by CONSISTENTLY winning. Do you think winning 4 or 5 games this season builds a winning culture that much more than winning 1-3 games? This is a serious question because that seems to be the argument you’re making. Run CMAC into the ground another year, don’t get trade value out of him, play only starters, in the name of winning 4-5 games. Do you really think that builds a winning culture? Or do you still think we’re a playoff team somehow, because I just don’t see it.

And yes, it’s stupid to start bringing in which team the #1 pick played for in the context of the discussion that was being had. You of course conveniently fail to consider what the team who traded the #1 pick got in compensation in your analysis of the pick’s value to a franchise. It just introduces extra variables that have to be considered but doesn’t even really matter to the point that was being made previously.

Again, my original response wasn't to your comments. Not sure why you're so triggered and confrontational about the points I made. The argument doesn't match because you decided I was responding to you when I wasn't. I actually think we're mostly in agreement. I never even mentioned #1 pick in the draft. I mention #1 QB off the board. 

So where we do seem to disagree is playing to win. I think at week 6, the team SHOULD be trying to win. Doing everything they can to find the right positions and concepts for the players they have now. And I agree that means giving more guys a chance to play. To build a stronger overall team. Let's be real, they're picking a QB with the first rounder. History has shown that a stronger team with a QB picked later in the first, will have a better chance for success (super bowl) than a weak team picking the first QB off the board.

 

[WUnderhill]

9 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Again, my original response wasn't to your comments. Not sure why you're so triggered and confrontational about the points I made. The argument doesn't match because you decided I was responding to you when I wasn't. I actually think we're mostly in agreement. I never even mentioned #1 pick in the draft. I mention #1 QB off the board. 

So where we do seem to disagree is playing to win. I think at week 6, the team SHOULD be trying to win. Doing everything they can to find the right positions and concepts for the players they have now. And I agree that means giving more guys a chance to play. To build a stronger overall team. Let's be real, they're picking a QB with the first rounder. History has shown that a stronger team with a QB picked later in the first, will have a better chance for success (super bowl) than a weak team picking the first QB off the board.

 

We’ve been responding to each other for a while so maybe things have gotten off track somewhere along the way. The original point you made that I responded to was “You don’t need a superstar QB to win” and I pointed out that a large majority of the past 20 or so SBs were won by “superstar” QBs. So basically saying, “yes you do need a superstar QB, and here’s proof”. Then your point was you don’t need to draft a superstar QB high in the draft, to which I countered that of those same 20 years of SBs, the #1 overall pick accounted for 3x as many Super Bowl winning QBs as any other pick (not counting # of Super Bowls PER QB because that is not the relevant stat). Then you said well they didn’t all play for their original team, that’s where it just started to feel like constantly moving the goal posts.

I get that you’re saying you can trade for them down the line or whatever, I just don’t think it’s a good strategy. We tried to trade for Stafford, he didn’t want to come here, yes partially I think because our head coach vs LA head coach, etc. but also we have to recognize that even if all that were even, he probably would have still preferred LA based on endorsement opportunities, etc. Or Tom Brady would still choose TB because of favorable tax laws, etc. We tried to trade for Watson and got outbid. We’ve tried to go the route of trading for QBs the past few years and it’s not working out. Also, the cost of trading for those QBs is high and hamstrings the franchise. We have the opportunity right now to go for the #1 pick, and part of my original point was the value of getting a franchise QB on a 5 year rookie contract, which is a huge advantage over trading or signing FA QBs. Also, the first round control through 5 years is a huge advantage over drafting a QB in rounds 2-7. If after 3 years you have to sign the QB to a huge contract which limits what you can put around him right at the same time you should be starting to compete for SBs, that is a massive disadvantage.