Weinke's contract

I would think that the incentive contract would play better with us because of our cap troubles.

 

who the frick cares about the frickin media? they probably know less about football than you do sandy. give the coaches some credit. hopefully they don't need our input as to who should be the starting QB.

isn't QB such a fun position to predict? right now none of us have much of a clue. we saw Weinke last year. there was some good to like and, for sure, some bad. the fact, that mag is saying that he is, with certainty, our starting QB for the next 2 seasons concerns me. i personally am optimistic about Wink but mag's history of siding with a pathetic QB is somewhat alarming to me. could be a bad omen. (i say this tongue in cheek as QB is obviously one of the tuffest positions to forecast. mag, you can grill me later on over my 9-7 prediction).

fasani has, barring injury, no chance of playin with the first string. Wink needs the reps with the first string. Peete will get a few for the reason mag cited and Fasani will get dogmeat.

a potent offense? we have an aging TE that has lost a step or two and is coming off an injury, no wideouts that you can truly characterize as weapons, and a "young" and irratic QB. improved offense? yes, with a huge pickup in the running game and Wink should improve. hopefully, just good enough to get us to the playoffs.

as you say brain, weinke (and some good game plans) will be the key.

 

Agree... Hey I understand my conversations in regards to QBs has not always been pleasant. Its cool. For the potential of any newcomers... Unlike an unnamed QB that started in '99, I have never said, in regards to another Panther QB that we would never have a winning season. I have only seen one season of Winky in the NFL, so no, I'm not prepared to say he will never succeed. But to me, thats whats fucked up about this whole deal, just because some dumbass gave Winky all these big incentives we are supposed to play him? Play him fine... its cool, but if he throws 3 ints in one game then bench his ass, he's got no legend behind him to prove successful in the NFL, keeping him in is a lost cause... NEXT...

In the end, I will have a huge smile on my face if he has a great year and a few of you boys come back and say, you dude... you were wrong about the winkster....

 

well, certainly, 9-7 predictions are surely the stuff of greatness

I never said Weinke was going to light it up (for the record, I never said anything about Weinke being locked in for two years - more that it would be two years before we could get something out of any future draftee), but he's the guy for right now.

As for my bad track record, I agree OTOH, I was basically going with what I'd felt from 2000 and made it apply. I didn't give Weinke his due until he stepped up and played the way he should have in gms 3/4 of preseason. I'm not a bandwagon guy, and I'm not by any means praising Weinke. I just get tired of the way people get with QBs - the controversy, the unabashed pimping of some unknown alternative just for shits and giggles.
And I did only side with one bad QB. Matter of fact, when people (90% I'd say) were clamoring for Beuerlein's head in 1999, following Detroit and on further, I was one of the very few to say that we needed to stay the course, it would develop. And it did.

And I was right about Craig

I'm not saying I know everything about QBs. QBs and DEs are the absolute hardest for me to judge, mostly because well-mannered, talented, smart men can fail and raggedy nothings sometimes make it. I can judge talent OK, it's judging success that I don't do well at and prefer not to do. That's why I don't make bold and ill-advised attempts at prediction.

 

1. If Fasani comes in plays above average at #3 and Winky plays below average at #1 is Winky still the guy?

2. Me either.

3. I like shits and giggles, it beats boredom and backing a guy that has not earned the right to keep a starting spot.

4. I love to make bold and ill advised attempts at prediction... it is fun - the only reason they are ill advised is that they are based on "gut"... career wise, my gut has gotten me a long way... you gotta trust yourself first...

 

1. Yes. Luckily, most coaches aren't reactionary people looking for the first reason to find to end someone's career or throw away the most talented player they have. Tends to work out that way, patience and guidance rather than whimsy and a new toy every few days.
That's why some teams cycle 2-3 quarterbacks out every year, and some teams have four coaches in eight years. And some teams carry a quarterback for years, and carry coaches for decades.

3. That's fine for some. I take this seriously. People take me seriously.

4. Depends on what you're leading yourself into. Gut might get you somewhere, so will luck, but common sense built society. Knowledge and advancement built society. Some paths work for some, some paths work for others. I can't rely on luck or faith, no matter how much of either I may have. Whatever works for anyone else, that's not my business and that's not my concern.

Believe it or not, Weinke's still under contract for a good while, and at a decent little sum. He's the most talented player we have or will have this year, he's the most able, he's the most ready. He's by far the only player we should be focusing our energy on in regard to deciding readiness and ability to take us where we need to go. Backups get seasoned - that's the way of the league. There's a reason, especially when the backup in this case didn't play two full seasons of college ball. Fasani needs time before he will even ask to be considered a challenger for the starting job.

 

3. Sometimes you take yourself too seriously... this is a message board - its all good.

4. Then don't try to correct or make light of people for things that work for them.

Disagree, I wonder how a Fasani would have done at FSU? My whole beef with the Winkster was that he all the studs around him... yes he performed (except against Oklahoma and 1 or 2 others)... my premise is a lot of guys would have done well in that system.

Winky has only played one season, it fell in his lap last year when I was dead wrong about Lewis... just because he has a nice contract conducive to more years don't make it right.

 

>> Sometimes you take yourself too seriously... this is a message board - its all good.

I know what I'm doing. I take pride in that fact, and others listen when I talk. It takes no more effort than being aloof of a situation and arguing for sport or because of predetermined bias.

>>Then don't try to correct or make light of people for things that work for them.

Don't rightly care what works for you, if it in fact does. This is about quarterbacks, no matter how much you want to deviate away from frightful little things like facts or procedure.

>>I wonder how a Fasani would have done at FSU?

Fasani ran the most sophisticated offense in college football, under one of the top offensive minds in college football. The conference isn't a terribly amazing defensive group, nor are there that many perennially good programs. He was running a team that was peaking - and couldn't take them that far. He had players around him - a QB-friendly system - a hell of a coach - and was still inconsistent, both in throwing and in production, lacked the arm control you'd expect, was off and on for inconceivable reasons, didn't show much growth as a player over time, and was never really that much of a leader - a number of scouting reports actually noted him as "not much of a leader" or "not a take charge kind of guy." He can see the second and third receiver, but doesn't make the right decisions as much as you'd often like to see.


None of those things have the least bit to do with the system or the players around him. I mean seriously - the guy completed 51% of his passes as a senior. he didn't break 50% as a junior. he's never been healthy for over 8 games in his playing career.

It's great to be able to go 15 of 25 for 230 and 4 TDs against a team like BC. I hope that's the player we get. But then there's the 11 of 25 and 8 of 23 against USC and ND. Remember he's in an offense where you're looking for high percentage passing.

He had as much opportunity as anyone - tell the truth, I felt that had the Cardinal had a better quarterback this year, they would have easily eclipsed last year's success. I felt this long before there was ever the slightest connection to Carolina, as I follow the Cardinal because of Tyrone Willingham - I just happened to luck out in the fact that I follow Notre Dame as well.

Fasani, much like Dameyune Craig here, was promoted due to attrition. While players ahead of him fell by the wayside, leaving for the NFL or baseball, Fasani ascended, rather than winning a job. He could never beat mediocre players to get the job you'd magine a player would want.

Did you ever watch Fasani in college? When you did, if you did, did you ever honestly feel like he was anything that stood out from the pack? I seriously doubt so. The whole thing is that you don't like Weinke and Fasani's a guy who is unknown. I really, really, really, really, really doubt you've got the slightest idea of what's going on with Fasani.

In the NFL, unknown doesn't get anyone looks at first string. That's the difference between gut and knowledge. Fasani has to earn a chance - he doesn't get a handout just because you don't like the guy in front of him.

I wish Fasani the best. he's got tools, and smarts, but those two things need to meet somewhere in the middle and then do a lot of work to get to the point where he'll need to be as a backup quarterback.

>>Winky has only played one season, it fell in his lap last year when I was dead wrong about Lewis...

Weinke won the job. he won it fair and square, and handled himself well when his shoulder was healthy. Whether you like him or not, he was the best quarterback we had, and is still the best we have.

>>just because he has a nice contract conducive to more years don't make it right.

Just because you don't like him doesn't mean it's time to pass judgement on him. Almost everyone here is willing to give him time before he's written off - while you put in disclaimers about this or that, you've written him off. He simply needs more time, in the offense he will actually be running, before anyone can legitimately say what type of quarterback he is or what he's capable of.

 

Its all in perception. Some (other than myself) would say the job fell in his lap - had Lewis not had that one god awful game, Lewis would have probably went on to start... word in camp was all he had to do was be steady and opening day was his.

Just because I want to see Fasani play with the first string offense has nothing to do with giving Winky his time. My "disclaimers" - thats BS, you know I'm not afraid to stand my ground. If I "knew" Winky was going to be a complete failure, I'd just say it... I simply have my questions about him, but then again, you enjoy making out to more than what it is.

>>"no matter how much you want to deviate away from frightful little things like facts or procedure. "<<

All I can say to this, is I've known people that stick to this to the bitter end, they know no other way to live than by following strict facts and procedure (procedure the key one) - These individual usually wake up one day later in life and say, I don't get it that should not have happend... me I'll keep the facts and procedure to my career, I have no fear of being wrong, so if I feel like something might happen, or maybe I should do something in a non procedural way ... well it makes life a little more interesting.

 

A little fear of being wrong, a good, slight healthy fear that actually makes you attempt to be right on purpose rather than by luck, is a good thing. It allows one to know what he's talking about more often than not. If you were as concerned about attempting to get what you're talking about right as you were defending a gut feeling without going out on some foolish "8th round pick" lie, you'd not need the 8th round pick lies.

Weinke wasn't handed the job. It was clear that the team intended Lewis to at least start the season - Weinke beat him out.

>>you enjoy making out to more than what it is.

I don't enjoy any of it. I cant' stand that you have to pimp a quarterback you haven't seen and wouldn't have been impressed with if you had, just because you don't like the one we already have. I can't stand that the biggest arguments you have on this are immaterial and don't really relate back to situations of the future.

>>Just because I want to see Fasani play with the first string offense has nothing to do with giving Winky his time.

If you just want to see every quarterback with the first string, that's your opinion, and I disagree with it and that's that. In general, I do feel that a player must earn a shot at first string of any consequence before he gets a shot at one. You're asking for hand outs just for whimsy. Interestingly enough, that's the way the entire league thinks, save for one or two instances in the past five years - and those were each in competitive quarterback situations, unlike this one.

I mean, it's not as if the quarterbacks rotate in camp. Oh, wait, they do. So it's not as if Fasani will be hampered in practice by "inferior players"...he just won't have earned the right to have time that would take away from the starter's preparation ....nor should he.

But you always just happen to dislike the starter when you say that - and you always just happen to have a backup you like just a little too much in accord with that. You've not really been rallying to see more of Peete, so the end result is that yes, you want to see more of Fasani, and since you have a very limited knowledge of RF past the Observer, it goes back to Weinke. I don't like pinning the tail on the donkey, but I tend to see this in this light, and I've not seen a reason to think otherwise.