I'm not sure that it does. Is Picket going to walk in year 1 and be better than Darnold? I would be surprised if that happened, I think they would probably be similar in his first year. In that instance, Rhule hasn't benefited in his 1 or done year, so its pointless to take a guy like Picket IMO. Picket doesnt help them in the short or long term, imo. Pick a position player who will help this year or pick Malik and hope he pans out.
Can Pickett be better than Sam day 1? It’s a low bar. It’s not what I’d want if I were a fan. It reeks of desperation. IMO, if the Panthers take Pickett it’s Rhule’s last year unless he produces. If they pick someone else, IMO, Tepper is going to let Rhule stay and build.
I don't know how hard Sam works compared to how hard Josh works. If that is true, then yes, Sam did himself a disservice. A lot of factors have gone into him not succeeding, but some of it definitely falls on him too. Looks like Zach Wilson is putting in the work this off-season. We will see if it pays off this season.
He was quoted at the time saying he didn't need to change his footwork as that is how he has always done it and he is comfortable with it. Ah, shame that. Wilson comes across as a hard worker, let's hope he can transfer it onto the pitch.
I have to question some people's evaluation of QBs here. Zach wasn't really as good as Sam was his rookie year. Even when Zach supposedly "improved" down the stretch, he still wasn't as good as Mac Jones. In fact, not even close. Jones is almost at the Chad Pennington level as a true rookie, and probably already better than Jimmy G. His mastery of their offense, and ability to read defenses, is already way ahead of "high football IQ Wilson". The only passer thing that Zach does better than Mac as is throw the ball harder - which is the classic bust trap. Jones's ceiling is easily higher than Zach's. Zach's ceiling is the mini Mahomes we were promised. Jones's ceiling is Joe Montana. Who do you think has a better chance of making it?
I will not accept that. Accuracy determines whether a pass gets to the receiver at shoulder height or ankle height; anyone who has ever watched a football game would agree that a ball at shoulder height is more catchable than one at ankle height. More catchable relates directly to a higher completion rate, despite a random opinion otherwise.
Here is the problem with Mac Jones summed up in one play. Joe Montana? Really? I don;t think so, Andy Dalton maybe
You are obviously clueless on how or why a pass gets completed and where a ball should be thrown. Very often a shoulder height pass is not the correct ball placement. SHocked I have to even type this.
I gave the most obvious example. I will agree that there is the rare time or two that a pass thrown at the ground is more catchable - if the receiver happens to have fallen down, for instance. For you to attempt to draw a conclusion from that that accuracy is unimportant to successful passing is preposterous.
When did I say accuracy is unimportant? I said the stat completion percentage has very little to do with accuracy. I think accuracy is very important.
One play is the evidence? That was his rookie year. Montana didn't start until his 3rd year. He throws a perfect 41 yard pass, on the road, in the playoffs, and a stud safety makes a great interception - and that's proof Jones isn't good? The funny part is the video starts with them saying, "NE has just converted two 3rd and longs..." Did you see what our QBs did against Buffalo this year?
That pass was underthrown a lollypop and too far inside. He just does not have the arm strength to be compared to Montana. Mac was the ultimate game manager this past season to make the jump to Montana is preposterous. As I have been saying rookie seasons are relatively meaningless. Let's see how he does when he is asked to carry the team.
6 days before that game, on that very field, Zach Wilson led the offense to -5 passing yards to answer your question
Here's exactly what you said - in the first post I responded to here: "Completion percentage has nothing to do with accuracy." Now you want to change that. I've already shown how accuracy is directly related to completions. To deny that is, as I said in that first response, simply bizarre.
The stat completion percentage does not show how accurate of a passer you are. I stand by that. See the link I posted with the writer writing much more than I care to.
