1. This Board Rocks has been moved to a new domain: CarolinaPanthersForum.com

    All member accounts remain the same.

    Most of the content is here, as well. Except that the Preps Forum has been split off to its own board at: http://www.prepsforum.com

    Welcome to the new Carolina Panthers Forum!

    Dismiss Notice

New Rumblings about Favre

Discussion in 'Carolina Panthers' started by Smoke Screen, Jul 3, 2008.

  1. chipshotx

    chipshotx Full Access Member

    Posts:
    13,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Gondwanaland
    Bazenez is more likely to be found in some young guy.
     
  2. Golden Hammer

    Golden Hammer South Pole Elf

    Age:
    60
    Posts:
    10,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Charlotte
    More likely, yes.....but so far we've done a HORRIBLE job of developing QB's. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    The Colts took a chance on Manning and it completely changed the franchise. Aikman, Marino, Elway......were all chances.
    I realize you could make a huge list of chances that didn't pan out, but some are worth taking a chance on. Furney's philosophy has been to take a chance on none, and our QB situation is really not a great one, and it showed last year. I think we should have traded up for Matt Ryan....I think he's worth the chance. Just my .02.
     
  3. presidence99

    presidence99 This MARRIAGE?

    Posts:
    16,930
    Likes Received:
    2,784
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    So was signing David Carr, he wasn't as big a gamble as any of the first round picks you mention but a gamble nonetheless. Also you can gamble on QBs in the late rounds/undrafted FAs and get some performers: Brady, Bulger, Warner, Hasselbeck, Romo.

    How many teams would be okay if they lost their number 1 QB in week 3?

    I never saw anything from Matt Ryan that made me think he could be special, I have a feeling years from now we'll be thanking the Falcons for spending so much money on a QB that sucks.
     
  4. Golden Hammer

    Golden Hammer South Pole Elf

    Age:
    60
    Posts:
    10,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Charlotte
    Some good points...Carr was a gamble, but I think a worse gamble than a college prodigy. Let me preface this by saying I liked the pick at the time, but we had film of Carr actually in the NFL. The college guys are a bigger question mark in the NFL, so they could go either way. I think Ryan will be special.

    2001 Patriots did pretty good when they lost their starter in game 2.

    1999 Rams did pretty good after losing the starter in preseason.

    1992 Packers did pretty good after Majkowski went down in game 3.

    I know there are examples the other way, but we just really suck at developing QB's....we don't even believe in it, evidently.
     
  5. chipshotx

    chipshotx Full Access Member

    Posts:
    13,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Gondwanaland
    2 of the 3 guys in your example were nobodies drafted very late or not at all. Sort of like Moore if you didn't notice.

    Anyway, if they drafted Ryan he would have little to no time to develop.
     
  6. Malapoo

    Malapoo Full Access Member

    Posts:
    6,210
    Likes Received:
    362
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Location:
    NC
    QB coach. :winkiss:
     
  7. presidence99

    presidence99 This MARRIAGE?

    Posts:
    16,930
    Likes Received:
    2,784
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    [​IMG]
    That's my job.
     
  8. The Brain

    The Brain Defiler of Cornflakes

    Posts:
    32,125
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Location:
    Over There ---->
    Um... you kinda contradicted yourself.

    If they can't develop QBs, wouldn't it be a huge mistake for them to waste a first round pick on one??
     
  9. Golden Hammer

    Golden Hammer South Pole Elf

    Age:
    60
    Posts:
    10,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Charlotte
    Yeah...point taken, but I wonder if we are bad because our raw materials weren't good and we weren't committed to it, or if we are really just bad at it. The Furney stance has always been to look for developed QB's elsewhere, so maybe a shift in that thinking may be needed.


    EDIT: It's difficult to really put a finger on the 'Why' of a QB prospect in hindsight. Why was David Carr so bad? By all rights he had the tools to be good....why was Ryan Leaf so bad? It's not a simple proposition, and there are no guarantees...unless you NEVER take a chance.
     
  10. chipshotx

    chipshotx Full Access Member

    Posts:
    13,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Gondwanaland
    I'd say it's 95% mental. Most of them have the arm.
     

Share This Page