Scouting Department vs. Front Office

[kungfoodude]

22 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

It's been a while...

If I recall correctly, there were a lot of changes when Rhule and Fitterer took over. And I remember in recent years feeling like we didn't have enough experience in that department. I'd probably need to take a closer look though. Sometimes it felt like we were just hiring people who were available as opposed to the best candidates.

Historically, they had some decent guys under Marty (many of whom have risen to executive level since), a good number of which got here earlier, some from the beginning of the franchise. With Marty making the final decisions though, a lot went wrong. There were always gonna be limits to that setup no matter how good the scouts were.

Gettleman? I know he made some changes (chief among them elevating Brandon Beans) but also said he didn't wanna make too many. During his time we had our best overall roster management, but it was inconsistent at points. Then he went to the Giants and took the opposite approach, kicking out well established people.

Fitt brought in some people that had decent reputations, but also some that were head scratchers. Never totally understood going with Cole Spencer to run college scouting when I felt like there were more qualified people like his old buddy Scot McCloughan (whose son is still on staff, I believe)

Like others, I was thrilled when we brought Adrian Wilson aboard but...oy

Where are we now? Well, our GM is a pro personnel guy by trade. Are we doing better in that department than we are in college scouting? Maybe, but it's kinda hard to tell when nobody can stay healthy.

Honestly, it feels as if there's not a consistent vision or structure in the scouting, like if you threw a bunch of Coryell and WCO guys together on a roster and expected a smooth offense. Not sure if I'm explaining those thoughts clearly, but hey

My vote, as I've said many times, is a full overhaul by someone who knows his sh-t, but I'm not holding my breath. I like Morgan, and if he's willing to stand up to Tepper that's a plus...

...but not enough on its own.

Yeah, that sums up my thoughts and, as always, thanks for your insight. I know you follow this stuff very closely.

The 2024 draft felt like another complete mess with very little rhyme or reason to the decisions.

 

[TD alt]

27 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, that sums up my thoughts and, as always, thanks for your insight. I know you follow this stuff very closely.

The 2024 draft felt like another complete mess with very little rhyme or reason to the decisions.

 

There was plenty of rhyme or reason to the decisions. We invested in the O-line (and D-line for that matter) in free agency. We took a step back overall on defense in order to invest in the offense. 

During the draft, we needed a play-making receiver, so we drafted one. We also drafted what many analysts considered the best RB in the draft---a true three-down back with legit play-making potential as well. Moreover, the hope is that Ja'Tavion Sanders will develop into a complete TE as well. All of these weapons will only help a QB in theory, and the offense in general. 

Of course they didn't exactly abandon the BPA philosophy, so when Wallace was available, they got him. If his 15 tackles yesterday is any indication, as well as his flash plays in earlier games (and the preseason), then there's some reason for optimism. And it's not like we don't need playmakers at LB.

As for anyone else, it's a dart throw. Day three picks are truly developmental and hit-or-miss. You should be taking guys that you feel may develop into something more, but if they don't they're not players you'll lose sleep over. 

Just because you don't agree with the strategy doesn't mean that they didn't have one. 

Edited 3 hours ago by TD alt

[kungfoodude]

5 minutes ago, TD alt said:

There was plenty of rhyme or reason to the decisions. We invested in the O-line (and D-line for that matter) in free agency. We took a step back overall on defense in order to invest in the offense. 

During the draft, we needed a play-making receiver, so we drafted one. We also drafted what many analysts considered the best RB in the draft---a true three-down back with legit play-making potential as well. Moreover, the hope is that Ja'Tavion Sanders will develop into a complete TE as well. All of these weapons will only help a QB in theory, and the offense in general. 

Of course they didn't exactly abandon the BPA philosophy, so when Wallace was available, they got him. If his 15 tackles yesterday is any indication, as well as his flash plays in earlier games (and the preseason), then there's some reason for optimism. And it's not like we don't need playmakers at LB.

As for anyone else, it's a dart throw. Day three picks are truly developmental and hit-or-miss. You should be taking guys that you feel may develop into something more, but if they don't they're not players you'll lose sleep over. 

Just because you don't agree with the strategy doesn't mean that they didn't have one. 

Yeah, I have no idea what you saw but it's definitely not what I saw. There is very, very little logic or reason to the players we picked in that draft nor the position we took quite a few of them. If anything, it telegraphed that they don't have any intention of getting better through the draft for at least a couple of seasons.

The free agency moves seem to be above Panthers average in some regards. OG overhaul was a big success, DB signings seem very sound, addition of Diontae was excellent. The rest of the signings are a mixed bag.

I would say the disparity between the pro personnel decisions and draft decisions are massive.

We will see how it turns out. 

[TD alt]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, I have no idea what you saw but it's definitely not what I saw. There is very, very little logic or reason to the players we picked in that draft nor the position we took quite a few of them. If anything, it telegraphed that they don't have any intention of getting better through the draft for at least a couple of seasons.

The free agency moves seem to be above Panthers average in some regards. OG overhaul was a big success, DB signings seem very sound, addition of Diontae was excellent. The rest of the signings are a mixed bag.

I would say the disparity between the pro personnel decisions and draft decisions are massive.

We will see how it turns out. 

You can't expect multiple train wrecks to be handled with precision. The FO had to have a certain amount of dart throws, so of course the results are a mixed bag. But for what we focused on, which was the O-line and the first couple of days of the draft, the plan was kinda obvious. And, you're right; we will see how it turns out. But the expectation should not be perfection. By many many accounts, if you come out of a draft with two legit starters, that's a good draft. I suspect that we may have three (maybe four if we're lucky). It will take a little time,  maybe one to three seasons before we can judge the success or failure of the draft.

[kungfoodude]

29 minutes ago, TD alt said:

You can't expect multiple train wrecks to be handled with precision. The FO had to have a certain amount of dart throws, so of course the results are a mixed bag. But for what we focused on, which was the O-line and the first couple of days of the draft, the plan was kinda obvious. And, you're right; we will see how it turns out. But the expectation should not be perfection. By many many accounts, if you come out of a draft with two legit starters, that's a good draft. I suspect that we may have three (maybe four if we're lucky). It will take a little time,  maybe one to three seasons before we can judge the success or failure of the draft.

I have yet to see any starting caliber players from this draft yet but hopefully they will emerge eventually.

[Tbe]

Dan changed up the scouting dept a little after the draft.

Who knows what that will do. His big hire was a guy who spent 15 years with the commanders. Meh

He did get an eagles guy though.

Edited 2 hours ago by Tbe