Kayboe

The Law & Order "dun dun" sound

Schoen and Daboll were lucky to retain their jobs after last season. They essentially have to win games this year to keep them.

Out of desperation and self preservation, it may behoove them to forgo QB this draft. It has been considered a weak QB class since over a year ago, and it's unlikely at pick #3 they'll be able to pick a QB that is a better NFL QB next season than Russel Wilson.

Skipping QB to take either Hunter or Carter with their first pick is a great way to have immediate on field impact rather than drafting a guy to hold a clipboard.

If Cam Ward somehow falls to them, they will most likely pick him, but every other QB prospect is even more of a project and unlikely to win a starting job in their rookie season. So I'd agree that taking a QB is not mandatory.

The question then becomes, if not a QB when picking at #3 overall this year, and you have to win games to keep your job, how and when do you have opportunity to draft your "QB of the future"?

I'd love to hear Schoen answer that question.

I think the debate is to extend him now or to use the option (based on the final line in the article.) If they extend him now it will be at a lower price than next season as the market for OT most likely continues to rise along with the salary cap each year.

If they are confident in his long term projection, they may prefer to negotiate a deal now to lock him into a deal at a lower annual average.

Given that he has started 40+ games and had his strongest season yet last year, the Panthers likely assume his value will continue to increase.

It may also help them with other contracts that are coming up to negotiate a back loaded deal or a front loaded deal depending on when they aim to have a championship window and when they have to pay their QB after his rookie contract is coming to an end

I don't follow the Panthers closely enough to know specifically which other players they may be looking to sign to long term deals besides Ekwonu and presumably Bryce Young. Just my two cents!

Can anybody please share your thoughts on what would indicate "getting your money's worth" or "good value" would be for something like this? Are some much more exposed than others where it makes sense to pay for it? Is it because they continue to remove data whereas for the average person that would be unduly arduous?

They advertise removing data from somewhere around 190 sites. What are the repercussions of missing sites like they claim competitors do? What's the end result if even the monitor plus service misses some?

How do I know if over time the service goes through "enshitification"?

This interests me, but I lack the savvy to know how it improves my life or if I'll ever notice a difference. I'd like to know what are reasonable expectations for it.