Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Management Philosophy


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#46 Achilles

Achilles

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 03:49 PM

The Hurney and Richardson philosophy is not the problem. It seems like a good philosophy for setting the Panthers up for success in about 2 years. Fox and the complacent, inexplicable play calling is the problem.

My biggest issue with what I see going on this year is just that it certainly seemed in the Giants game that Fox simply did not care to make any scheme or personnel adjustments at halftime or throughout the second half.

I am so SICK of hearing..."well we were behind so we had to throw the ball...anytime you're in that position its tough..."

WHY THE HELL WERE YOU BEHIND IN THE FIRST PLACE???

I don't want to jump to conclusions...but it seems like the coaching staff really phoned that one in. I mean 3 INC passes with 1st and Goal from the 4 and it ends in an INT. THat reeks of complacency.

If they're not TRYING to win the game, then maybe the handwriting is already on the wall on Fox's time with the team.

Maybe the Top Brass is covetting the idea of grabbing a Top 5 draft pick.

Is it concievable that Richardson kept Fox on because he wanted the captain to go down with the ship...grab a high draft pick...and install a new coach and be called a genius when its all said and done?

To me...Fox is looking like the scapegoat and maybe that's what he wants, too).

#47 Sandy Claws

Sandy Claws

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,395 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 03:54 PM

Dead cap space is irrelevant because there is no cap plain and simple. You can call jake's salary dead cap space for the point of argument but without a cap it is meaningless. Plus his actual salary is already reflected in the 112 million for this year. That is why cutting him was not a financial decision.


There is no "official" cap, that's undeniably true, but the Panthers have stated along wiht other teams that they are going to operate on a budget just like there was a cap. It appears as though the number from last year is the budgeted amount. Almost 10% (10.7 million) of that was used to pay off Jake as a "non exercise fee" when they chose not to pay him 12 mill + to extend 1 year. (But we do still owe 2 million more.) They're sticking to their budget while some fans would rather they spend freely to buy a Lombardi.

When guys like Kemo and Lewis were cut, not paid the 5 million payment in the offseason which everyone acknowledged wouldn't have happened anyway, their contracts became 1 year deals. This is the area where the cap and payroll diverge. They were paid nothing so they had no salary. But the cap hit accerelerated and is part of that dead cap space which boosted the figure you quoted to 124 million. BUt the point that is irrelevant is that the money spent on them has already been accounted for in past payrolls.


Nothing pertinent. Cap doesn't exist, payroll budget does. Not everybody gets to act like our government and set budgets only to keep extending them. Some folks have to stick to them.


As for the money not being there, that is crap as well. They spent 112 million last year. They spent 112 million this year. They raised ticket prices and received the same TV money. Add it up and it clearly shows they had more money this year than last but didn't spend it all


No it's not crap. They have their money budgeted for salaries. Also some for other expenses including stadium, FO staff etc. As much as everybody is homing in on the NFLPA statement that the owners still get paid by TV contract even if no games are played, the reality is that eventually, there will be a year when they have to put a product on the field without getting that money, or possibly reduced payments over several years. They have to make some pretty big payouts even without player salaries next year. The tv money will make it easy to cover that but eventually,. they'll need to pay salaries without it.

#48 MrBubba

MrBubba

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,616 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 04:04 PM

Two Words, 'Drew Brees"

Or how about the other FAs and trades the Saint's made for players that made them contenders and Super Bowl Champs. No you can't buy your way to a Super Bowl, you need a balanced approached. Sometimes FAs don't work out, but neither do Draftees, cough Eric Shelton, cough. If you have a hole on your team, try and fill it with the best guy you can find and who will come here. No one expects Jerry to go the Dan Snyder approach, but we don't want Snyder's opposite either. At least show you are serious about building a winning team. When you have a major hole at WR and you don't even sniff around some of the available vets; it doesn't scream "serious". When agents say they can't even get returned phone calls for the possibility of signings, it doesn't look good.

I want to resign our Vets, Beason, Kalil, Williams; and I was distressed to Gannt's tweet last week that they might let Williams walk in F.A. Even though we are grossly below the former salary cap level.

I hope they turn around and resign Williams and that a new agreement will get Jerry off the cross for the NFL. It can't be denied Jerry and Co. have gone cheap this year and it appears to be all in the name of owner unity. Other owners are making signings, not all but some. I hope an agreement can be made with the owners and union, and then Jerry will loosen the purse strings.

#49 Darth Bobo

Darth Bobo

    The Dude

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 259 posts
  • LocationRTP

Posted 17 September 2010 - 04:06 PM

Consider the possibility that the Panthers as an organization have had great success and savings at developing positions all over the field, and an embarrasing record at other positions.

We have drafted tackles, ends, safeties, and corners well for years, secured many bargains. Even signed a free agent corner well. And on the offensive line, we've landed several franchise anchors, in the draft and free agency. Same with running backs, good in the draft, good in F.A.

As far as Mr. Scot's post goes, I think we can continue to expect our team to continue the management philosophy that it has in all of those positions because it has worked for us. We shouldn't fix what ain't broken.

But we've been absolutely questionable locating, evaluating, developing Quarterback, Wide Receiver, and Tight End talent. The year we went to the SB we had a healthy Proehl(free agent 2003), Smith(drafted 2001),and Muhammad(drafted 1996), and a fresh Delhomme. From 2004-2009, our personnel decisions all over the receiving group ended badly.

We threw everything we had at the quartback draft this offseason, to the point where talking heads said we sacrifice too much, took the search too far. If we take for granted that the 2010 draft has us set at QB, then the unaddressed positions are TE/WR.

Since running the ball has always been our team's identity, our 3 TE's cannot produce more than Jeff Davidon's run-support play calling affords them. I'll leave it to the experts to say whether our TE's are underutilized.

I find it hard to conceive our best players on the field when Dante Rosario is on the bench and Dwayna Jarrett is on the grass.

Anyway, that leaves the catches and drops to our receivers. Suffice it to say, that our last 7 years of receiving have been generally uninspiring, in spite of stellar performances by Steve Smith. The challenge to improve our completion % and YAC is Tyke Tolbert's. He must be able to communicate the difference between what we have and what we need, and when he cannot coach up a rookie, he must ask for the funds to pay a free agent.

Brandon LaFell is his first test, Gettis is his second. If they pan out, Tolbert should get some commanding freedom to influence our free agency singings.

One thing should be clear though, we won't get back to the Superbowl again until we have receivers as good as Smith/Muhammad/Proehl. If we are to do this in the draft alone, then we are a few years off. Will Jordan Gross still be around then?

Edited by Darth Bobo, 17 September 2010 - 04:09 PM.


#50 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,742 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 17 September 2010 - 05:46 PM

There is no "official" cap, that's undeniably true, but the Panthers have stated along wiht other teams that they are going to operate on a budget just like there was a cap. It appears as though the number from last year is the budgeted amount. Almost 10% (10.7 million) of that was used to pay off Jake as a "non exercise fee" when they chose not to pay him 12 mill + to extend 1 year. (But we do still owe 2 million more.) They're sticking to their budget while some fans would rather they spend freely to buy a Lombardi.



Nothing pertinent. Cap doesn't exist, payroll budget does. Not everybody gets to act like our government and set budgets only to keep extending them. Some folks have to stick to them.




No it's not crap. They have their money budgeted for salaries. Also some for other expenses including stadium, FO staff etc. As much as everybody is homing in on the NFLPA statement that the owners still get paid by TV contract even if no games are played, the reality is that eventually, there will be a year when they have to put a product on the field without getting that money, or possibly reduced payments over several years. They have to make some pretty big payouts even without player salaries next year. The tv money will make it easy to cover that but eventually,. they'll need to pay salaries without it.


So all three responses are totally unrelated to the conversation. We weren't talking whether they should be on a budget or not simply that they spent no more money this year than last yet they had more to spend. So all the pinching pennies is a ruse to convince players they need a bigger piece of the pie not reality as you suggest.

The Panthers have more money to spend in 2010 than they had in 2009 due to increased ticket prices across the board and breaking up prices between lower tier (rows 1-15) and the higher tier (16 and above). The TV money for 2010 is the same or possibly higher than 2009. That is a fact.

Your whole argument is predicated on the argument that if they have no money next year due to a work stoppage they need to save their pennies now. First of all that is not germaine to this discussion since we were talking 2010 not 2011. Secondly, if we don't play next year it will be totally the owners fault since they are the ones pressing the issue and they would be the one locking out the players. The players are fine with the status quo. It is the owners who want a bigger piece of the pie. So if they don't have any money it is by their own design and could be easily avoided.

As for the 2011 TV money, the commisioner said it was in the form of a loan which would have to be paid back which was negotiated as part of the last TV revenue deal. The players union is suggesting the owners put in the provision without the player's knowledge knowing they were going down this road and weren't representing the players interests when they included the provision which was in violation of the collective bargaining agreement. I leave that to the lawyers though.

But as I said and it is perfectly clear, Richarson has plenty of money to pay his folks and players. The fact that some teams spent 150 million this year and other spend 85 million tells me that there is clearly not a widespread expection that money is going to be tight now or in the future. Otherwise they all would be pinching pennies and they clearly aren't. Richardson as one of the CBA negotiators is spearheading this and that is why he is going on the cheap. He has plenty to do what he wants but he can't spent it and still cry poverty next march. It is all smoke and mirrors.

He can make any budget he wants and spend what he wants. But if he puts a substandard product on the field he will feel it in his pocket just like Jacksonville and Tampa. This week is the first time I remember a blackout being discussed in years. And it isn't just the economy but an expectation we are going to be just like Tampa Bay, the bottom dweller.

Edited by panthers55, 17 September 2010 - 05:59 PM.


#51 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,085 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 17 September 2010 - 10:37 PM

"But" you say, "we've saved all that money. Assuming there's football next year, we'd be poised to go on a free agent spending spree, right?"

Indeed, you can expect the Panthers to work on signing free agents, or potential free agents. Look for names like Jon Beason, Ryan Kalil, Thomas Davis and DeAngelo Williams to get contract offers from the team.

"But those guys already play here" you say.

Exactly


I think fans need to realize we have to free up major cap cash to resigning these big extensions to our core...which may not have DeAngelo in it....due to his RB age..3 years max for him.

It frustrates everyone to see a product on the field that is not going to compete at the elite level. After the lockout I hope there is a new dynamic and urgency to win again.

#52 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,683 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 17 September 2010 - 11:15 PM

As long there are teams that make major moves/trades, there will be fans who grow impatient with their teams not doing so. Cause in their eyes, the team is always 1 or 2 key moves away from winning the superbowl.

While there have been times, I've wanted certain players/positions to be picked up, I don't throw a fit when it doesn't happen. I don't throw the front office and/or owner under the bus, just cause I don't agree with them.

#53 pantherclaw

pantherclaw

    Wise Ass

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,683 posts
  • LocationGalveston

Posted 17 September 2010 - 11:23 PM

Its a constant battle...

Trying to aquire talent ya need, while retainning it. It hardly ever goes the way its expected though. Talent doesn't always translate; personalities don't always mesh; injuries; players wanting to leave.

Doesn't matter how well they try, and do, somebody will not be happy with the efforts.

#54 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed KB 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,608 posts
  • LocationDa City

Posted 17 September 2010 - 11:46 PM

Yes, but you can't say that that number is irrelevant because the Panthers came out very early and said that even though there wasn't a cap this year they were going to still operate as if there was one. Other teams like the Pats, Steelers, Eagles, Cardinals all came out and said, and done, the same thing this organization did.


they might have but they also did something this team hasnt.like extend their core talent.

#55 chris999

chris999

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,023 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 18 September 2010 - 04:55 AM

So right now, we have a fair amount of complaining going on about the way personnel matters are handled. The source of all the angst? That would be the front office decisions to avoid going big into free agency, choosing instead to concentrate on building through the draft and retaining their own free agents as core players (except, of course, when they're looking for a bonanza payday).

Not sure why people are surprised at that happening this year, seeing as the team has been taking that approach for a while now. This year's decision to unload several older vets, most of whom the team saw as making a little more money than their performance would merit, might make it seem like the approach has kicked into a higher gear. It really hasn't. Those two things are separate issues, but I suppose I can see how people put two and two together.

In reality, the Panthers are not the only team that prefers to work this way. The Steelers are well known for it, and I've heard more than one Eagle fan complain about the team continually having money to spend, but not spending as much of it as they wish. And yes, there are others, but the main focus here is of course on Carolina, so let's take a closer look at things right here in our backyard.

Here at home, the real bad news for the unhappy crowd is that there's reason to believe this MO isn't going away anytime soon.

With both of the Richardson sons gone, and Danny Morrison's job description being concentrated on the business side of things, the most powerful man in the football operations area of the Panthers is Marty Hurney. For all intents and purposes, Hurney is king of all he surveys. And Hurney seems to like the approach (though peppered with an occasional trade). Throw in how all indications are that Hurney and Fox are no longer the "package deal" that they once were thought to be, so even if John Fox isn't retained, Marty Hurney likely stays.

"But" you say, "we've saved all that money. Assuming there's football next year, we'd be poised to go on a free agent spending spree, right?"

Indeed, you can expect the Panthers to work on signing free agents, or potential free agents. Look for names like Jon Beason, Ryan Kalil, Thomas Davis and DeAngelo Williams to get contract offers from the team.

"But those guys already play here" you say.

Exactly :sosp:

I'll grant that the flux which could result from a new head coach may make some waves, but signs in general point to Marty Hurney being around as GM of the Panthers for a while to come. Should he happen to be replaced or succeeded though, it'll likely be by someone with the same philosophy. After all, it starts at the top.

I don't write this to depress you. Rather just to say that if you're waiting for some big shakeup to come, I wouldn't hold my breath.


i usually agree with you, but this isnt building through the draft, this is just being plain cheap. he should have re-signed some of our vets. you dont let players like jon beason, ryan kalil and deangelo williams walk into they're last year of they're contract. it says to those players that he doesnt appreicate them, and that he is willing to let them taste the free agency market.

it really pisses me off, because if we dont get beason signed, someone is going to offer him a poo-ton of cash, and JR might just let him walk. this complacency has a possibility of ending really badly.

#56 magnus

magnus

    Eternal Gameface

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,275 posts

Posted 18 September 2010 - 12:24 PM

I don't think it's so much a problem with the philosophy, it's more a problem with never making minor adjustments to the philosophy year-to-year.

I'm completely on board with 'build through the draft' but my only request with that is to take proven talent in free agency when it is there and still has value. Example = Anquan Boldin, Vincent Jackson.

I think that's what everyone's REAL problem is with the FO this offseason. And it's hard to just swallow that when you hear Hurney say Boldin didn't fit what we were doing and then he goes out and looks like Anquan Boldin still on MNF for a 'contender.'

I don't want big splashes in free agency, I just want smart ones and then continue to build through the draft.

DISCLAIMER: I know Boldin wasn't a free agent, neither is VJ, but they could (could've in Boldin's case) be had for a fair price.



what part of the current philosophy needs only a minor tweak to go to a $7 million a year deal to an openly unhappy #2 receiver, constantly hurt, that costs a 3 and 4 to get?

#57 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,074 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 18 September 2010 - 12:28 PM

the panthers may model the steelers in running the FO but where they missing being like the steelers eagles for that matter by miles is TALENT EVALUATION.
steelers are exceptional at replacing a younger version of the guy that is moving on. they never reach for draft picks, they know when to pull the trigger on a guy and let him go and they just don't get themselves in trouble that way.

#58 Sandy Claws

Sandy Claws

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,395 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 08:14 AM

So all three responses are totally unrelated to the conversation. We weren't talking whether they should be on a budget or not simply that they spent no more money this year than last yet they had more to spend. So all the pinching pennies is a ruse to convince players they need a bigger piece of the pie not reality as you suggest.
.


Not true again. I was trying to stay fairly close to the OP. The first paragraph

So right now, we have a fair amount of complaining going on about the way personnel matters are handled. The source of all the angst? That would be the front office decisions to avoid going big into free agency, choosing instead to concentrate on building through the draft and retaining their own free agents as core players (except, of course, when they're looking for a bonanza payday).
.


Management set a budget and is sticking to it. It's not all that hard to understand. Ticket prices went up but no additional money was added to the player payroll? What happened to stadium expenses? I doubt they dropped, quite possibly the opposite. FO expenses? Who knows? They don't get reported publicly.

Ruse or reality? The reality is that we are operating on a budget. The budget doesn't seem to be acceptable to some such as yourself who want more money spent. I would love to see a player the calibre of a Boldin, Marshall, or Jackson added like any other Panther fan. Any would improve the team. I guess I'm different in that I see the logic in not busting the budget and giving up draft picks for a player that we may not be able to keep beyond this year due to the uncertain labor situation.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com