Against all options, Newton makes most sense for Carolina

[blackcatgrowl]

The two scenarios aren't really equal.

Scenario 1 - We draft Cam, and he busts. Three years from now we're looking for a QB. We're out of a first pick player. Meaning that we're at 0. (One player drafted [+1], one player becomes a bust[-1])

Scenario 2 - We get a stop-gap QB and take a position of need at #1 (DT). The DT becomes a reliable player. In three years, we're looking for a QB. Meaning that we're at +1. (One player is reliable [+1], we're looking for a QB [0])

Scenario 3 - We get a stop-gap QB and take a position of "need" at #1 (DT).

The DT busts. We're out of a first pick player.

Why people assume or play it like QB is the highest risk position is astonishing to me. Teeray posted a review of busts at different draft positions in the first round, and QB was actually lower than some others.

[mav1234]

Which proves he's a crucial part of making the passing game work.

And what was our record that year? Oh... yeah... horrible... Jake's numbers were so high, because we were playing from behind and he was having to throw. He still didn't put us in a position to win.

To the first... He is a crucial part. So too is the quarterback. Strangely enough, the passing game DID work without a #1 draft pick, so maybe it can again. Clearly, it's more than just "shutting down Smith" because it didn't take until 2009 for teams to realize that if they shut him down the offense struggled (and he arguably had a decent season in 2009 anyway). Placing it all on Smith is way oversimplifying things.

As to 2004, Jake played so well, even without Smith, we basically missed the playoffs in the last week of the regular season. Despite him putting up great numbers, the injuries we sustained that year overall really crippled us.

[grateflday]

Couldnt have said it better myself... right from the article.

So, I ask, even if LSU cornerback Patrick Peterson is the supposed "safest" player in the draft, when you size up the Panthers' roster, can one justify investing so much money on a corner who might be too big that he needs to shift to safety in a few years? Will that add the kind of victories per season Carolina needs? Could Peterson ever do enough to justify that sort of spending?

[mav1234]

ANALOGY. GOOGLE IT. Was not directly calling you old nor comparing YOU to my grandfather, it was just an example... untwist the g-string. I think you're close minded for wanting to use the SAME formula that has gotten us NOWHERE in the past. sure, I completely understand why some people wouldnt want him, I'm on the fence myself. I just want something to be excited about and nobody else in this draft offers that. after all... this is just ENTERTAINMENT, so before you go off on the "I want to be excited" part.. I am a FAN of a sports ENTERTAINMENT team and want to be ENTERTAINED. Not bludgeoned to death from constant mediocrity.

...You mad, bro? :D

I don't want to use "the same formula." The Fox formula was to bring in veterans and have them run your team. I want us to develop a quarterback, but I don't want us to reach for one if we aren't really sure he can be "that guy."

Winning will get me excited. Losing badly, no matter who is our QB, isn't exciting.

[blackcatgrowl]

And we were still in line to make the playoffs until New Orleans beat us the last game of the year.

So you're making a point that we FAILED to make the playoffs without Steve Smith? We didn't even have a .500 record. :lol:

[blackcatgrowl]

To the first... He is a crucial part. So too is the quarterback. Strangely enough, the passing game DID work without a #1 draft pick, so maybe it can again. Clearly, it's more than just "shutting down Smith" because it didn't take until 2009 for teams to realize that if they shut him down the offense struggled (and he arguably had a decent season in 2009 anyway). Placing it all on Smith is way oversimplifying things.

As to 2004, Jake played so well, even without Smith, we basically missed the playoffs in the last week of the regular season. Despite him putting up great numbers, the injuries we sustained that year overall really crippled us.

I love it... you guys are totally proving my point.

We DID NOT make the playoffs without Steve Smith. We weren't even .500... you all kill me...

[Knaakedup]

...You mad, bro? :D

I don't want to use "the same formula." The Fox formula was to bring in veterans and have them run your team. I want us to develop a quarterback, but I don't want us to reach for one if we aren't really sure he can be "that guy."

Winning will get me excited. Losing badly, no matter who is our QB, isn't exciting.

Not at all :yesnod:

lol kiddding... I'll actually agree with this one. I'm just tired of sucking. I cant tell you how miserable it was being the only panther fan and having to watch that crap last year.

[Ruff]

So you're making a point that we FAILED to make the playoffs without Steve Smith? We didn't even have a .500 record. :lol:

That was also without Stephen Davis and DeShaun Foster.

[Mr. Scot]

It's not about the safe pick.

It's about the right pick. It's about the guy you think is the best player in the draft that fills a need you have. It's about not reaching for a guy with a huge transition you aren't sure of just because of the position he plays.

Exactly.

[teeray]

Exactly.

But what if you are like me and don't think it is a huge reach??

[blackcatgrowl]

One other thing to note:

To the first... He is a crucial part. So too is the quarterback. Strangely enough, the passing game DID work without a #1 draft pick, so maybe it can again. Clearly, it's more than just "shutting down Smith" because it didn't take until 2009 for teams to realize that if they shut him down the offense struggled (and he arguably had a decent season in 2009 anyway). Placing it all on Smith is way oversimplifying things.

And... there is your problem...

Our passing game DID NOT work. We squeezed into a Superbowl with Delhomme under center, then failed to win it. And when I say squeezed, I mean double overtime win in the playoffs, and a season of last second wins... and with that the moniker of "cardiac cats".

Coming in 2nd place is NOT good enough. Not having consecutive winning seasons is not good enough. We want to see dominant play. We want to see years of consistent winning.

The John Fox era was not successful. It was lucky. You people who think a "successful" organization was what we had in Carolina in the past 7 years really needs to consider what being a champion and being dominant means.

[mav1234]

I love it... you guys are totally proving my point.

We DID NOT make the playoffs without Steve Smith. We weren't even .500... you all kill me...

If it was all Smitty, why didn't we make the playoffs in 2007 when we had him for basically the entire year?

... We were one game away from the playoffs in 2004 (the last game), even if we ended 7-9, still pretty close without Smitty.

In Jake's 4 seasons where he finished out the season as our starter, we went to the playoffs 3 times and missed it by one game one year (2004). When Jake played 13 games in 2006, we went 8-8 and we missed the playoffs by one game again (if only Weinke had Steve Smith to throw to.. oh wait, he did).

Smitty's only missed one full season... Why didn't he carry us into the playoffs before and after Jake, if he was all it was? Why didn't he do it when Jake wasn't around?

face it... it was more than just Smitty, even if he is great.

[Pox 08]

Man this got to 240+ posts relatively quick. I tried reading through it all, had to skip around a bit, Some good stuff though.

[Mr. Scot]

Not at all :yesnod:

lol kiddding... I'll actually agree with this one. I'm just tired of sucking. I cant tell you how miserable it was being the only panther fan and having to watch that crap last year.

So are we. We just don't agree that Newton will rescue us from that.

But what if you are like me and don't think it is a huge reach??

Then we disagree, which is perfectly fine.