9th pick set in stone

[Krovvy]

Guys, there's a lot of quarterback needy teams this year. There's a good chance the Panthers will even get leapfrogged for Richardson. One of the reasons why I think Tepper is going to be balls to the wall aggressive, trading up with Chicago if possible.

If this was two, or three, or four years back sure. Patience is key, it's usually what I advocate. I'm not the type of person that likes to trade up, or trade known players. However, I think there's a very good possibility the Panthers will make an offer to Chicago, which includes D.J. Moore.

[mav1234]

3 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Sure, like Darnold today, he had time to run around in the pocket while his WRs still couldn't get open.  Granted, he wasn't getting planted into the turf, but the extra time by the OL didn't do diddly for our WRs that were continuously covered like the DBs were their Siamese twins.

Moore was open quite a bit, but he also isn't being schemed open, and Darnold can't hit him deep (Fields has a much better arm than Darnold and I think he could).

[Martin]

2 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

This thread is premature. We could still pass the Falcons for #8.

What’s the scenario? I’m intrigued 

[45catfan]

2 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

Richardson or Levis

Richardson.  The gap between the top guys and the next tier will force Richardson WAAAAY up the draft board.  None of the QB needy teams ahead of us are rolling the dice with such a risky prospect.  Stroud, Young and Levis will be gone.  We'd be the only ones stupid enough to take such a boom or bust prospect that high.

[JawnyBlaze]

5 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

The scenario where we draft bpa?

BPA among WRs and TEs in the second. First is a QB no matter what. 

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

BPA among WRs and TEs in the second. First is a QB no matter what. 

Gotcha.  And yeah that has to happen

[ECHornet]

2 minutes ago, Martin said:

What’s the scenario? I’m intrigued 

The relevant games for passing the Falcons IF we're tied in win%:

MIN @ CHI

DAL @ WAS

NYG @ PHI

LAC @ DEN ***Most Important***

DET @ GB

The Chargers MUST beat the Broncos. If they lose, at best we could tie the Falcons in SOS and they own the tiebreaker (division record).

We need the Chargers to win (favored), and at least 3 of the remaining 4 games to break our way to jump the Falcons. 

-------

I postsed the above in another thread. Updating it now since the Bears lost, we would need all of the Commanders, Eagles, Chargers, and Packers to win. Long shot.

Edited January 8, 2023 by ECHornet

[mrcompletely11]

4 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

This thread is premature. We could still pass the Falcons for #8.

Walk me through this

[mav1234]

1 minute ago, ECHornet said:

The relevant games for passing the Falcons IF we're tied in win%:

MIN @ CHI

DAL @ WAS

NYG @ PHI

LAC @ DEN ***Most Important***

DET @ GB

The Chargers MUST beat the Broncos. If they lose, at best we could tie the Falcons in SOS and they own the tiebreaker (division record).

We need the Chargers to win (favored), and at least 3 of the remaining 4 games to break our way to jump the Falcons. 

So remaining, PHI to win, WAS to WIN, LAC to win, GB to win.

Actually that seems very possible

[roaddog96]

None of this pick talk matters until we get the coach hire. There are scenarios where a coach may not value any of these QB’s in the draft. What happens then? Will you be upset if someone like Steichen or Johnson (or whoever) says I want a veteran and will use the draft capital elsewhere?

[mav1234]

Just now, roaddog96 said:

None of this pick talk matters until we get the coach hire. There are scenarios where a coach may not value any of these QB’s in the draft. What happens then? Will you be upset if someone like Steichen or Johnson (or whoever) says I want a veteran and will use the draft capital elsewhere?

so uh do we just not talk about the draft until we hire a new coach or?

[ECHornet]

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Walk me through this

Posted above

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, ECHornet said:

Posted above

Thx

[ForJimmy]

13 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Sure, like Darnold today, he had time to run around in the pocket while his WRs still couldn't get open.  Granted, he wasn't getting planted into the turf, but the extra time by the OL didn't do diddly for our WRs that were continuously covered like the DBs were their Siamese twins.

Our WRs looked solid in some games and lost in others. That’s a scheming issue and falls on McAdoo. It’s not the best WR room, but it’s not a total weakness. We could use another solid WR, but most teams could…