Does anyone actually think Bryce will actually be good?

[csx]

50 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

Do you think all of our WRs should have the same skillset? 

We got Johnson who is supposed to be the shifty WR and probably has more upside than Renfrow. 

We also have Thielen who is basically an old Renfrow. 

Do we need more Renfrows on the roster? I dont really get the love for the dude, he has one season over 1k yards with 9 TDs and a bunch of meh seasons. Dude hasnt topped 400 yards in 2 seasons. 

 

He's a Clemson fan. That's all there is to this.

[Navy_football]

Love how this conversation has developed. This is an actual football conversation. 

I think Canales has watched enough tape to formulate a plan for what he wants THIS offense to be. That's the advantage of bringing in young offensive minds. They're progressive and flexible. The draft and free agency was based on Canales' vision for THIS offense. I don't think a lot of what his past offenses looked like will necessarily dictate what this one looks like. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

38 minutes ago, travisura said:

The worst would be he gets hurt early in the season and we have to do all of this again next year.

Not really. Maybe it might finally wake this team up to the fact we should constantly be trying to develop a QB2 into a possible QB1. I've never understood the mentality of this is our number 1 guy and if he gets hurt the season is over. There should always be legitimate QB competition. Getting better should always be the focus. What harm is there in bringing in another guy who might be a better fit for the system? If BY gets hurt, stinks up the field, or just gets beat flat out in the QB race, being better prepared than a geriatric (NFL standars) red rocket is not a bad thing. 

[PootieNunu]

Just now, SmokinwithWilly said:

Not really. Maybe it might finally wake this team up to the fact we should constantly be trying to develop a QB2 into a possible QB1. I've never understood the mentality of this is our number 1 guy and if he gets hurt the season is over. There should always be legitimate QB competition. Getting better should always be the focus. What harm is there in bringing in another guy who might be a better fit for the system? If BY gets hurt, stinks up the field, or just gets beat flat out in the QB race, being better prepared than a geriatric (NFL standars) red rocket is not a bad thing. 

I am not sure if that was an option considering what we have invested in the position. It is Bryce or bust for at least this season. 

I would prefer we had some real competition for Bryce considering his on field play from last season, but I am pretty sure Tepper was not ready for that and DD committed to building around Bryce for this season at the least. 

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

Not really. Maybe it might finally wake this team up to the fact we should constantly be trying to develop a QB2 into a possible QB1. I've never understood the mentality of this is our number 1 guy and if he gets hurt the season is over. There should always be legitimate QB competition. Getting better should always be the focus. What harm is there in bringing in another guy who might be a better fit for the system? If BY gets hurt, stinks up the field, or just gets beat flat out in the QB race, being better prepared than a geriatric (NFL standars) red rocket is not a bad thing. 

I guess the question would be how much of an asset do you spend on another QB. If we have a top 5 pick and Young is still a question mark from being injured do you spend another top pick on another rookie or use that on another valuable asset? The more film we have a Young the better we can answer that question IMO. 

[PootieNunu]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

I guess the question would be how much of an asset do you spend on another QB. If we have a top 5 pick and Young is still a question mark from being injured do you spend another top pick on another rookie or use that on another valuable asset? The more film we have a Young the better we can answer that question IMO. 

It all depends on who is available when we pick, but I dont see any way that you dont take a hard look at the QBs after one season of historically bad QB play and another season on IR. 

I dont know who could look at that and still say this is our unquestioned QB moving forward. 

[mrcompletely11]

5 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I guess the question would be how much of an asset do you spend on another QB. If we have a top 5 pick and Young is still a question mark from being injured do you spend another top pick on another rookie or use that on another valuable asset? The more film we have a Young the better we can answer that question IMO. 

Depends on injury

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

It all depends on who is available when we pick, but I dont see any way that you dont take a hard look at the QBs after one season of historically bad QB play and another season on IR. 

I dont know who could look at that and still say this is our unquestioned QB moving forward. 

It’s just a bad scenario. Hopefully that doesn’t happen. What if he plays 2-3 games, looks a lot better, but then gets hurt? I’m glad we invested in the OL in attempt to limit this from happening…

[strato]

16 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I guess the question would be how much of an asset do you spend on another QB. If we have a top 5 pick and Young is still a question mark from being injured do you spend another top pick on another rookie or use that on another valuable asset? The more film we have a Young the better we can answer that question IMO. 

I would have gone Rattler this year.

Personally I don’t think it would take a number one pick to replace Bryce Young. But it’s Tepper so they would swing for the fences.  I like the idea of at the very least take a Rattler type when you have the chance and just churn the QB room trying to upgrade it with every move. 

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, strato said:

I would have gone Rattler this year.

Personally I don’t think it would take a number one pick to replace Bryce Young. But it’s Tepper so they would swing for the fences.  I like the idea of at the very least take a Rattler type when you have the chance and just churn the QB room trying to upgrade it with every move. 

We needed so much roster help I wasn’t a fan of drafting one unless it was very late. 

[Navy_football]

Having a competent backup QB is a blessing and a curse. If your #1 gets injured, then you have a guy that can keep the train on track. But... every time the starter makes a mistake, fans will be calling for the backup. 

But... a good young backup can demand real draft capital when it's time to renew a contract. So, there's that. If he's better than the #1, then you have more options and leverage.

Unfortunately the Panthers aren't in a position to go that route yet. Once the team is brought up to NFL average, then moves like that become a real possibility. Regardless if you're sold on Bryce Young or not, this team has/had too many holes to fill to make luxury draft picks like a good young backup QB. One day. One day. 

[Navy_football]

11 minutes ago, strato said:

I would have gone Rattler this year.

Personally I don’t think it would take a number one pick to replace Bryce Young. But it’s Tepper so they would swing for the fences.  I like the idea of at the very least take a Rattler type when you have the chance and just churn the QB room trying to upgrade it with every move. 

If he would have been there at the Panthers' 5th rounder, then maybe. But taking Spencer when the second best TE was still available in the 4th wouldn't have been wise. I agree though. I think Spencer will be a good QB in the NFL. The Saints got a steal. He'll be a starter for them or great draft capital at some point. 

[Waldo]

4 hours ago, CRA said:

I do think there are limitations of Bryce in a traditional pro pocket.  I don't think putting Bryce under C and asking him to play a simplistic traditional role is a fix for him.  We might squeak out a win we didn't last year but that's not developing him to reach whatever ceiling he has

I think he is going to have to be in the shotgun playing a little untraditional....you just need the weapon and scheme to make him dangerous.   He is a unicorn of sorts.  It's like asking Cam Newton to play the game as Peyton Manning did as a rookie.  You are going to have a bad time.  Cam wouldn't' of been rookie of the year.  He would have been benched. 

We drafted a unique QB....and nothing about our HC hires and offensive visions say we as an organization get that. 

I don't have a Bryce issue.  I think our org is clueless under Tepper and I think Tepper is creating bad marriages that don't work.

It's both. He didn't see well in the shotgun either. The only positive this year IMO is that they will be picking top 5 again. I just don't think there is a good enough NFL offensive scheme you can run with Bryce. He has too many limitations and if they didn't blow so much to trade up for him they wouldn't be forcing it so hard this year again. 

Edited May 22 by Waldo

[strato]

Re Rattler:

We probably could have done something to grab him and have the TE too. He was pick 150. But I didn’t expect it. 

If Canales truly can help QBs it would be a crime not to have QBs for him to help.

Edited May 22 by strato