• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2021 Carolina Panthers Thread - Time for the 2022 thread

Official 2021 Carolina Panthers - 2021 Schedule Released

I think we are an over 7.5 win team, but I always have a tough time pulling the trigger on season long win totals when a critical injury to Darnold, CMC, Burns, or really any O-Lineman could severely affect our win total. I would imagine that’s the case for at least 3/4 of the teams in the NFL, so I just always FEEL safer betting the unders. I would love to know if there are any stats to back that theory up.
 
7.5 wins over/under is a tough call

Depends on Watson. If he's in Charlotte and starging 15+ games, hammer the O. I think he can get them to 10-11 Ws. Think it's in the 6-8 range with Darnold.

Speaking of Watson, Buzbee broke his radio silence yesterday to say they're nowhere near a settlement and how disappointed he has been with the NFL's response. Apparently, he made 4 plaintiffs available to a league investigator, and I guess he didn't like some of the questions being asked of his clients. As to not being near a settlement after some media speculation of that happening, I think that means Watson isn't offering enough of Mr. Green yet.
 
I think we are an over 7.5 win team, but I always have a tough time pulling the trigger on season long win totals when a critical injury to Darnold, CMC, Burns, or really any O-Lineman could severely affect our win total. I would imagine that’s the case for at least 3/4 of the teams in the NFL, so I just always FEEL safer betting the unders. I would love to know if there are any stats to back that theory up.

Half the teams in the league were under 7.5 and I'm not confident the Panthers are better than half the teams in the league. I'd go with the under because of injuries. This is going to be a very young roster with an unproven QB, poor or inexperienced LT, and a mercurial defense.

It's also important to factor in the additional game and whether it's home or away in predicting win totals.
 
I don't see much difference between this year's team and last year's team other than we won't be starting three rookies on defense, CMC will play more than 3 games, and our quarterback can throw the ball down the field. I also doubt we'll lose 8 games by one score or less.
 
I don't see much difference between this year's team and last year's team other than we won't be starting three rookies on defense, CMC will play more than 3 games, and our quarterback can throw the ball down the field. I also doubt we'll lose 8 games by one score or less.

i think this year's team is a lot better, we added a ton of depth on defense:

Reddick, Perryman, Bouye, Fox + Rookies
 
I would be hesitant to bet anything on a QB first year in a new system. Sometimes there is a full year learning curve to totally ingest the terminology and playbook. Some flourish in a better system after leaving a bad one.
 
i think this year's team is a lot better, we added a ton of depth on defense:

Reddick, Perryman, Bouye, Fox + Rookies

Agree that the team as a whole should be better. I thought you had a nice draft. But the NFCS should be interesting. Atlanta is going to outscore some teams. And who knows how good NO is going to be with Winston at QB, especially after purging some contracts. Also thought they had a meh at best draft. I see NO has having the highest ceiling and maybe the lowest floor of the 3 teams not named TB, whereas I see Atlanta and Carolina in that 6-8 range.
 
I’m going on record to say I think we end up with Watson. I don’t know how I feel about it but it just seems like it’s going to happen.
 
538 doesn't like the Horn pick.

[h=1]How Much Value Do Teams Lose When They Don’t Draft A Quarterback In The First Round?[/h]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...-dont-draft-a-quarterback-in-the-first-round/

Fitterer’s selection of Horn this year was the 12th most destructive pick of the past decade.[SUP]6[/SUP] Regardless of your personal evaluation of Fields as a player, it seems clear that passing on a quarterback — any first-round quarterback — was a massive, value-destroying error for Carolina. And we don’t need three, four or even five years to say that with confidence.
 
How many quarterbacks have the Browns taken in the first round ?
 
How many quarterbacks have the Browns taken in the first round ?

Screen-Shot-2016-03-25-at-10.43.23-PM.png
 
I mean I guess that article from fivethirtyeight.com is right, if you look solely at cost / salary of positions. But historically, for every Patrick Mahomes you've got that Browns Jersey...

Oh wait, I suppose changing QBs every year does sell more Jerseys.
 
Yeah, as I said in an earlier post, if you can spot elite QB talent, you get rookies at a bargain; if not, you pay a premium for sure things. But perpetually swinging and missing on 1st round QB's is a losing proposition (see Browns). For 538, they see it as a game/lottery you have to play. Can't win if you don't play. The good news/bad news is most of your current or future HOF QB's were not drafted in the Top 10, so everyone can play but having an early pick does not necessarily improve your odds.

So the question becomes, did coaches like Belichick luck into Tom Brady at pick 199 or did he spot HOF talent? Remember Brady was playing behind Drew Bledsoe until Mo Lewis lacerated Drew's kidney.

Andy Reid spotted Mahomes and ran to the podium with that pick, and predicted his performance. Baltimore traded back into the first round to draft Lamar Jackson. So some have an eye for true talent.
 
Yeah. That's the conundrum. The best position to be in is to have an elite QB on a rookie deal. The worst position is to be drafting a QB in the 1st round every year. The problem is that there aren't many good QBs outside of the 1st round nowadays. The best QBs outside of the first round over the last few drafts are Minshew, Lock, Hurts, and Brissett. You have to go back to Garrappolo in the 2nd round of 2014 to find a QB who has been a regular starter and back to Wilson in the 3rd of 2012 to find a legit star.

I think the 538 piece is an exaggeration with hyperbolic language, but the value of a QB in the 1st vs. the rest of the draft is high and the need for a cheap QB is high as well. I would say the same goes for LT as well. So if you need a QB or LT, you should just go ahead and take one in the 1st.
 
Yeah, we've done well with our last 2 1st round picks with Jackson and Flacco. But before that and for an offensive coach, Brian Billick had god awful taste in QBs. He brought in Scott Mitchell, Elvis Grbac (at his end), and Jeff Blake and fell in love with Kyle Boller in that 2003 draft (I'd heard the FO was split on Boller). Boller ended up being 1 of the biggest reasons for his demise.
 
Yeah. That's the conundrum. The best position to be in is to have an elite QB on a rookie deal. The worst position is to be drafting a QB in the 1st round every year. The problem is that there aren't many good QBs outside of the 1st round nowadays. The best QBs outside of the first round over the last few drafts are Minshew, Lock, Hurts, and Brissett. You have to go back to Garrappolo in the 2nd round of 2014 to find a QB who has been a regular starter and back to Wilson in the 3rd of 2012 to find a legit star.

I think the 538 piece is an exaggeration with hyperbolic language, but the value of a QB in the 1st vs. the rest of the draft is high and the need for a cheap QB is high as well. I would say the same goes for LT as well. So if you need a QB or LT, you should just go ahead and take one in the 1st.

I would include Dak Prescott on the list of non-first round legit starter/borderline star QB's from the past decade.
 
Thanks. Bad omission on my account. Derek Carr as well.
 
Disappointing. Seems like he’ll be a versatile role player and not the stud LT we need. Hope we hit on enough picks this year that LT can be the clear priority next year.
 
Disappointing. Seems like he’ll be a versatile role player and not the stud LT we need. Hope we hit on enough picks this year that LT can be the clear priority next year.

You don't get stud LTs in the 3rd, you get developmental OTs. If you had wanted that, you should have taken the NWern kid in the 1st. That said, Christensen and Hudson were 2 OTs I was looking at for my Ravens in the 3rd and am disappointed we didn't take Hudson when he was there at the end of the 3rd.
 
Back
Top