Question for those who don't wanna draft a QB

[DaCityKats]

^^^^^ i agree. my brother is a huge eagle's fan and he hates kolb.

[OchoNueve]

^^^^^ i agree. my brother is a huge eagle's fan and he hates kolb.

Moore must be better then...

[Carolina Husker]

The only position that improves this team significantly, and to quantify that I'd say more than another two or three win season, is QB. Without a change at the QB position this season, we will be the worst team in the league again.

Obviously we'd all like to improve at DT or add a top flight CB to the roster, but neither of those positions makes us any more likely to win more than 2 games again next season.

We have the worst QB roster in the league, and taking these clowns through the NFC South again next year is insane.

[MHS831]

*cough* Scot

First off: I'm open to hearing what you say and not trying to start some silly argument...

Are you banking on drafting a Brantley, Barkley, or Pryor type over the next 2 years and picking up a vet this year like Volek or Bulger?

I'm asking this because when you actually put the names down on who we could hold out for, I still prefer taking Gabbert. So basically: What QB (in future drafts) are you looking at beyond this year if you don't want to draft one now?

Cheers.

Good question, because I may come off like one who doesn't want a QB. Here is why:

1. Giving up this soon on Clausen is not Panther-like.

2. Drafting Newton (character concerns) is not Panther-like.

3. Drafting a QB is not Panther-like.

But then again, these are not your Father's Panthers. No more is the philosphy "A punt is not a bad play." "We want to run the ball and beat you 13-7" etc. We are going to be an attacking team on both sides of the ball.

This has not registered yet.

Nobody knows if the guys short of Luck will be better than the two options we have now. I am not opposed to drafting a QB, but there are reasons it bothers me.

1. These QBs are not worth the first overall pick.

2. If he busts and Clausen develops, we win right? No! We lost Dareus.

3. The lockout could be a long one. We are basically drafting for 2012.

The only way I would not draft a QB this year is if I traded down and picked up a first rounder in 2012. THen I know I would have the picks to move up into the first round and get a very high pick.

After saying that, I am warming to the idea of Gabbert.

[TheRealDeal]

last offseason we tendered Moore for a 1st and a 3rd when we thought he was the future.

This offseason (according to darin gantt) we tendered him "only for the lowest amount possible $1.275 million"

Since we have placed such a low tender on him this offseason and he is a superior QB to Kevin Kolb, it will be interesting to see the bidding war erupt for Matt Moore's highly coveted arm once football operations begin.

That's incorrect. He was tendered the lowest pick value (a second) because he was undrafted but his contract MUST be a 10% raise from last year, which would pay him roughly $3.5mil next season.

Also to your point, the market for Kolb started out at 2 firsts, which shows the Eagles don't really know what his market is and are delusional. It has since dropped to a first and there has been some speculation but nothing concrete, so don't be surprised if it drops even lower.

Answer me this: Since Kolb was drafted in the 2nd round and has largely been mediocre in his career thus far, what made his value go up? What all of the sudden makes him worth a first rounder?

Again, you can't compare their value now because of the shithole Moore just came out of and his recent injury but the conversation was about who is the best QB out of that class, and so far, it's been Moore.

I'd like to ask you to point to something other than his perceived trade value as evidence that Kolb has been better than Moore.

BTW, I do love the civil conversation. It's nice to have a good discussion, until the post below ruined it.

a superior QB to Kevin Kolb? :lol:

fug you :) I'll ask you the same thing I asked 89, why do you think that? Grass is always greener?

[Peppers90 NC]

I just think that none of the QB's are worth the #1 spot. We have other needs and there are other players at that spot that are more of a guarantee to contribute than a QB.

I think this is for the majority of us who prefer other options than QB at #1. If we had the opportunity to trade down then grab Cam or Gab, but for me at least, I just dont think even the best QB in this draft is in the top 7 overall talent, which 6 of those guys are defenders.

And then there are some that just hate on Cam. I like him better than the other QB options personally, just not using the #1 pick on him or Gabbert.

[Jackofalltrades]

I think this is for the majority of us who prefer other options than QB at #1. If we had the opportunity to trade down then grab Cam or Gab, but for me at least, I just dont think even the best QB in this draft is in the top 7 overall talent, which 6 of those guys are defenders.

And then there are some that just hate on Cam. I like him better than the other QB options personally, just not using the #1 pick on him or Gabbert.

If we traded back to say 8-10 then taking QB wouldn't bother me, it's easier to justify the risk there IMO.

[MattB]

I think this is for the majority of us who prefer other options than QB at #1. If we had the opportunity to trade down then grab Cam or Gab, but for me at least, I just dont think even the best QB in this draft is in the top 7 overall talent, which 6 of those guys are defenders.

And then there are some that just hate on Cam. I like him better than the other QB options personally, just not using the #1 pick on him or Gabbert.

I agree that Cam/Gabbert are not in the same class as recent no.1's like Bradford and Stafford but guys like Flacco and Freeman were mid 1st round picks and became pretty good NFL quarterbacks. If Freeman was in this year's draft people would say he's not worth the 1st pick too.

[roaddog96]

The reason why I'm not so hung up on picking a defensive player is because our D is already good as-is, where we may need a tweak here and there.

"There is hope: The Panthers actually fielded a playoff-caliber defense in 2010, at least according to the measures we use at ColdHardFootballFacts.com. They were No. 12, for example, in Defensive Passer Rating, our measure of each team's ability to stifle opposing quarterbacks. For some perspective, the 14-2 Patriots were No. 13 in Defensive Passer Rating. The 13-3 Falcons were No. 14 in Defensive Passer Rating.

The Panthers were also No. 12 in what we call the Defensive Hog Index, a measure of each team's defensive front. And they were a top 10 unit in run defense, surrendering just 3.94 yards per attempt on the ground last year.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/03/25/panthers/index.html#ixzz1HeEAdFqW

Although I think that none of the QB's are top 2 talents, there are QB's who could be difference makers down the line if developed properly and land in the right system. The question is, do we address, in my mind, the biggest weakness long-term for us, or do we add to what is already a strength and wait another year?

[Sheldon Wolowizard]

I first off have to say I didn't get to watch that many panthers games this past year since I live in the Seattle market, but I got to see a few. From what I saw, I'm not sure if it would have made a huge difference having Moore, Clausen or anyone else for that matter in the pocket. IMO our O-line didn't pass block worth squat last year and I would imagine it's extremely difficult to get comfortable and in a rythem when you are being flattened constantly. If Brady, Brees, Rivers, Manning or any other QB got less than 2 steps before having the Dline in the backfield I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be spectacular either.

I think we need to address the O line before we even worry about drafting a QB. Otah is a monster when he's healthy, but overall, from what I saw, our line needs serious help.

[nagai]

The short answer is no. I think that's getting too cute.

The reason I don't want a QB (though I'm not completely against the idea) is simply because I don't believe in any of these prospects. As Scott said, not every draft has a franchise QB, and yes there have been several QB's in previous drafts who I did like. I don't want to spend the 1st overall pick in a guy I don't believe in, it's that's simple. This isn't about not wanting to take risks. I'll be happy to take a QB that no one else liked as long as I'm convinced he'll succeed y'know? I've made this point many times before, but when making a decision, your read - what you think will happen, comes before risk and reward. In this case, my read is that there's no franchise QB in this draft, and so the risk/reward of these prospects don't come into play.

PS. I don't think the risk/reward thing is so simple either. Say we draft a QB who ends up being pretty bad in his first year, someone like Andrew Luck is within our reach next year, would we take him? No we won't. We're pot committed to whoever we drafted 1st overall. I expect this to last a good 3 years. Risk/reward isn't as simple as people make it out to be. Getting it wrong at QB this year means we've made a mistake that would last us for a long time. Does that mean we should never take a chance? Of course not, but I want to at least push all in on something/someone I believe in.

[Razzy]

I think Clausen gets at least one more year with this weak QB class. Draft another QB and push him into a starting role and 2011 will look a lot like 2010.

[Mr. Scot]

If we traded back to say 8-10 then taking QB wouldn't bother me, it's easier to justify the risk there IMO.

Still wouldn't be my first choice, but if we got a good deal on the trade, I'd have an easier time with it.

[Catalyst]

Our current situation is this: We have young prospects. What we lack is a veteran presence. I don't really see adding more youth to the equation as a helpful thing.

I agree that we do need a veteran presence at QB for the short-term, but that's still not going to solve our long-term issues. Unless you think signing Marc Bugler or Billy Volek will suddenly turn Clausen or Pike into Pro Bowlers.

- That said, I would happily take the risk of adding more youth IF there were a quarterback that struck me as a special prospect. There isn't. Newton, Gabbert, Locker, Dalton...you see other guys just as good or better in every draft. Nobody in this bunch stands out. And none of them is worth the #1 pick.

No player in this entire draft is worth the #1 pick. It's not a traditional year. As long as that's the case, we might as well get our QB now as opposed to waiting for next year's class that may or may not be any better.

- So then if there's not a guy worth the number one, why not take a flyer on a guy in a later round? See above. We've already got that (twice). Why get yet another one? There are other positions those picks could be better used on.

I agree here, actually. We either draft a QB 1st overall or not at all. Don't want another mid-round guy.

- People confuse "best quarterback in the draft" with "franchise quarterback". Those two terms are not interchangeable. At various times, Heath Shuler, David Carr, Tim Couch and JaMarcus Russell were all "the best quarterback available". But were they franchise quarterbacks? No. Not every draft has those, and this year is one of the ones that doesn't.

First off, nobody had Russell labeled as a franchise QB or even the best QB available. I recall almost every draft expert saying that Brady Quinn was better and that if the Raiders weren't picking 1st overall Russell would have a solid chance at slipping to the late 1st round.

That said, I disagree that there aren't any franchise QB's this year. I think Cam Newton IS that kind of player. I know a lot of you don't, but I firmly believe he will be a stud in the NFL. Passing that kind of talent over because we're afraid he might be a bust is just asking for another decade of mediocrity.

- Folks keep saying "we need offense". That's all well and good, but if you really want offense this year, drafting any of the current crop of quarterbacks isn't a good move because none of them can contribute right away. You'd be better off going AJ Green if that's what you really want (though for me, receiver is another position that doesn't need to get any younger).

Again - WHO CARES if none of the QB's can't play right away? I honestly could give a f**k less about next year other than just seeing improvement. The reason I want a QB... why I want Newton - is because I believe he's going to be an elite NFL QB. I don't want him to play as a rookie if it can be helped, TBH. But even next year a lot of the QB's are spread guys who won't be ready day one anymore than Newton will be. That will put us another year behind waiting on them to develop.

You really think Rivera is going to sit back and let 3 years go by on a 4 year contract just waiting for a QB that the experts and fans deem "worth" whatever pick we have that year? He's got a job to do and he'll want to address QB ASAP so he can do that job without having to worry about a HUGE missing piece at the most important position on the field.

- Are the guys that we already have question marks? Absolutely, but so are the guys in the draft. You don't back up question marks with other question marks. That's a recipe for disaster. To put it another way, you don't take project QBs at number one. A quarterback taken #1 overall should be a guy who, if needed, could contribute immediately. That guy just doesn't exist this season.

Not taking the QB with the most ability and potential for greatness out of fear of taking a risk is the recipe for disaster. I know Matt Ryan and Ben Roethlisberger and Joe Flacco have spoiled everyone over the last 5 years or so, but the truth is they are the exception and not the rule.

Phillip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Josh Freeman, Eli Manning, Tom Brady, Carson Palmer, Matt Schaub, Jay Cutler, & Matt Cassell ALL sat out all or most of their rookie seasons before being given a chance to play. In the case of Rivers & Rodgers - two of the best QB's in the game - they spent 2 & 3 years respectively on the bench before playing.

By your logic, the Chargers & Packers made HUGE mistakes by drafting those guys and not playing them early-on, despite the fact that neither of them were deemed ready to play early in their careers even if they hadn't had established vets ahead of them.

- And speaking of Clausen and Pike, people act like we already know they're worthless. Ditto Matt Moore. The truth is we don't know any of that because last year was such a boondoggle that it's not fair to judge anybody based solely on that. Disagree with me on that if you want, but Ron Rivera agrees, so you'll be fighting him on that point too. I have no influence on what the team decides, but he does.

I don't know what we have in Clausen & Pike yet, that's true. But I saw enough of Clausen to know that while he may very well improve, he'll never be an elite starter in the NFL. Pike? His arm is WAY too weak for the offense we want to run. Matt Moore? I like him as a backup and his arm is certainly strong enough (or was pre-injury) but again, he had his chance and blew it. He'll never be a starting QB in the NFL. I'd be willing to have Moore as a stop-gap starter, sure, because I think his skillset makes him a solid fit for Chud's vertical passing offense, but I've seen enough of him to know that he's just not a long-term answer at QB.

- A side note on Moore. He's actually got more experience, connection and familiarity with this system than either of the other guys do. And when Hurney talks about him, he always refers to him as being "injured" last year. From everything that's been said, it seems fairly certain that Moore will get the chance to show he's worth keeping. What he does with that chance is up to him.

Even during his "great" stretch to end '09 he was far from special. He was solid, even very good at times, but that was as part of Fox's conservative offense. I'm not sold that Moore can lead an offense that gameplans to throw 30 times a game - not that I don't expect us to run, but should it come down to that, Moore hasn't shown THAT kind of big-time ability to be an Aaron Rodgers or Ben Roethlisberger. Like I said, he's a solid backup. Nothing more. I hope we re-sign him in that capacity and give him a chance to compete for the starting job this year, but in the long run he's just a stop-gap.

- Are there guys who are expected to be better available in next year's draft? Yes. Can we count on getting one of them? No. But does that mean that we should just take the best guy available in the draft this year? Also no because frankly, as mentioned, they just aren't worth the #1 pick :nonod:

It's WAY too early to tell who will be available (enter the draft) and of those who do/will we have no way of knowing who will be considered top tier. It's nothing to see a top-ranked prospect drop to 2nd or 3rd round player in one college season. See Jake Locker. It's also nothing for a guy to come out of nowhere and establish himself as a top-10 player. Just look at Newton.

But right NOW, beyond Luck, I just don't see anyone that I like THAT much better than Newton. I like Kirk Cousins some, but Brantley reminds me - just like Gabbert - of Alex Smith and Landry Jones I don't think is anything special. Cam Newton is a special special player. His skillset is so rare and he's got a good head on his shoulders AND leadership ability. Why pass him up so that we can have our pick of mediocre QB's next year?

Also consider the very likely possibility that we'll be forced to trade up to acquire one of these players, which could very well cost us a 2nd rounder if not the next year's 1st rounder - IF NOT BOTH. Too much to give up when we have a more talented player AND the #1 pick right NOW.