QBs Carr and Harrington to visit Panthers

David Carr thread 2.0

http://blogs.charlotte.com/panthers/

discuss

 

here or there?

 

I saw as much on Total Access this morning. Bias aside, Seattle would be a bad fit for Carr. He's not a WCO quarterback. His best scheme fit is here, and he's got just as good of a shot at a ring in Charlotte as he does in Seattle. And as a bonus, he's got a better shot of starting as a Panther before he'd start as a Seahawk.

Just a thought -- I wonder how much, if any, influence Trent Dilfer will have in this decision.

 

So Carr would rather be a backup than a starter? Talk about a lack of competitive fire. Not sure I would want him here.

 

Maybe we could land Carr after all. I had thought he would have gone to Minnesota, who has a pretty decent line and set around him.

Here makes more sense than Seattle. Hasselbeck didn't have a very good year, but he was playing hurt, and I don't feel that the fan pressure is as much there as here. In either case though, he's in a situation where the starter has to lose a job.

 

Look at the teams that need starters.

 

I guess that would depend on what team you're talking about. Oakland might offer him more money and a chance to start but, he would be going to yet another team with a crappy O-line and will surely take another beating.

 

Quartebacks by nature are very competitive people that I think given the choice would rather be on the field than not, even if they are in a worse situation. I personally think that this is a smokescreen and the real truth is that no one is interested in Carr as a starter.

 

or it could be that he thinks he can beat out Jake and would rather not play for a losing team all his life and end up a cripple for life

 

I've changed my mind. Maybe Yas's article does imply Seattle is the other team Carr is interested in, and not the only other team interested in him. Maybe Carr is humble enough to read that he plays mechanically and without instincts, and that he needs to work on that before he starts again.

QB controversies only happen if the starter isnt playing well. If he is, then everyone says its too bad the backup doesnt have a chance to play, and then forgets about it. But of course, most starters have some periods where they don't play well.

Just for the record: Dallas had Meredith and Morton, and then Morton and Staubach. Staubach may have joined the team while Meredith was still there, but he would have been an interesting 3rd stringer who hadn't thrown a pass yet, or something. Meredith retired after a hugely disappointing playoff loss in the mud to Cleveland. I read he wanted to unretire later (I have no idea how much later, maybe even a year or 2), and asked Landry, but Landry said no, or so the story goes.

Only Morton and Staubach was a controversy when Staubach was challenging Morton, who was a better passer. Landry was alternating them, for several games before finally going with Staubach. His superior leadership settled things.

I think the fans chanted We Want Morton, during games when Meredith did something bad, and it may indeed have been part of why Meredith retired early. I don't remember this. My father talked about it at the time. Morton was probably the best passer of the 3, but something was missing.

Just continuing to ramble here, I bet leadership is a big deal in all QB controversies. I think Jake came in and quenched any QB controversy with his leadership. I think he eroded that last year with the pouting. Maybe having a talented qB behind him (and an O scheme he thinks has a chance to work) will bring back the "Let me me a leader" Jake.