Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

If you knew then what you know now...


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#46 unicar15

unicar15

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,613 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:23 PM

Day one...invest in a good offensive line. This isn't a Newton problem. This is a "we spent all our money on an 80 million dollar backfield" problem. We should have invested in different areas. Carl Nicks could have been a great pickup. A lot of us also wanted Ben Grubbs. We needed to get better OL play than what we had. We lost Travelle Wharton to FA. Jordan Gross was coming off an injury. We were planning all along to have a rookie starting at left guard. We have a career journeyman our best option at right guard. Then we have a 2nd year guy who has been mediocre at best as our best option at right tackle.

No QB, RB, FB is going to be successful behind that group of OL. Everything starts with those guys and you can't expect a 2nd year pro to be successful when he gets zero protection. Imagine how bad it would be if Newton wasn't as mobile as he is? It would be a complete disaster instead of a disaster with occassional bright spots.

#47 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,535 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:26 PM

Day one...invest in a good offensive line. This isn't a Newton problem. This is a "we spent all our money on an 80 million dollar backfield" problem. We should have invested in different areas. Carl Nicks could have been a great pickup. A lot of us also wanted Ben Grubbs. We needed to get better OL play than what we had. We lost Travelle Wharton to FA. Jordan Gross was coming off an injury. We were planning all along to have a rookie starting at left guard. We have a career journeyman our best option at right guard. Then we have a 2nd year guy who has been mediocre at best as our best option at right tackle.

No QB, RB, FB is going to be successful behind that group of OL. Everything starts with those guys and you can't expect a 2nd year pro to be successful when he gets zero protection. Imagine how bad it would be if Newton wasn't as mobile as he is? It would be a complete disaster instead of a disaster with occassional bright spots.


It's a coaching and decision making problem.

And you'll find no bigger proponent of building the OL than me. The braintrust completely blew it there.

#48 Marguide

Marguide

    South of the Border

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,417 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:28 PM

Rivera has actually stated that the reason they started Newton from day one was because it gave them the best chance to win. They would have preferred he sit and learn, but ultimately chose to throw him in the fire.

See why I say "choosing short term benefits over long term ones" applies here?


What Rivera said was probably true, he did give them the best chance to win. However, RR stated repeatedly through the first part of the season that their objective was to develop Cam first and foremost. If that meant throwing more than would normally be desirable, or if it meant losing more games, so be it. Their objective was to develop Cam. Do you really think they were going to do that by having him on the bench?

#49 La Pantera

La Pantera

    humpin' habanero

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,607 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:31 PM

This what would've happened if they sat Cam...

He would've missed a valuable years expierence.

Chud would think himself an offensive guru and try to make an offense that fits our mobile QB and could catch the league by surprize.

So year 2 we're running the same crap we're running now and it wouldn't work. Setting Cam back two years.

Rivera and Chud get a third year just to make sure the second wasn't a fluke.

Repeat.

#50 carolinarolls

carolinarolls

    Mel's brother Del

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,287 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:33 PM

the oline is bad. it really is.

but we have not seen Cam do what QB's that have stud OLine's do. Even when he played good last year he was not reading D pre snap and delivering a strike to the weakness of the defense. he wasn't audibling coverage changes or routes to take advantage of the scheme he reads in front of him as he walks to the line.

he ran from trouble. screened out of pressure, and bombed it (more accurately last year) at single coverage matchups. Quarterbacks with that MO rarely get the benefit of all PRO OLines. They don't need them.
Let's not go overboard and pretend like this guy can deliver Brady-like strikes as long as he gets a few extra seconds.

Our OIine is bad but don;t get all pissy when we dont bolster it with a few probowlers this summer. That just isn't gonna happen.

#51 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,282 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:37 PM

...would you have favored starting Newton from day one or would you have preferred he sit his rookie season, get adjusted to the pro game and start in year two?


Don't get the question.....

Having a bad OL and no run game in 2012.....doesn't mean Cam somehow wasn't ready. The 2011 record book shows he was.....he just doesn't have coaches and a complete team around him.

What does he need to get adjusted to on the bench?

#52 carolinarolls

carolinarolls

    Mel's brother Del

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,287 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:44 PM

"invest in an offensive line"

wtf

invest what exactly?

anyone ever heard of the salary cap?

maybe we can do better when we trim some of the pro bowl salaries we pay to mediocre performers on this team. But if we are going to invest in a top 5 offensive line, we have the wrong quarterback. QB's that have the ability to evade do so to their own protection as well. Some guy dancing around in the backfield running the option and playing a screen game is practically impossible to provide protection for in relation to a guy who stands in, steps up, and delivers a catchable ball.

#53 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,535 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:46 PM

What Rivera said was probably true, he did give them the best chance to win. However, RR stated repeatedly through the first part of the season that their objective was to develop Cam first and foremost. If that meant throwing more than would normally be desirable, or if it meant losing more games, so be it. Their objective was to develop Cam. Do you really think they were going to do that by having him on the bench?


Ask guys like McNair and Rodgers.

#54 La Pantera

La Pantera

    humpin' habanero

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,607 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:57 PM

Ask guys like McNair and Rodgers.



The Rogers situation isnt similar. He wasn't the #1 overall pick and he had a hall of fame QB in front of him. Cam had to start there wasn't a better QB on the team and he was took too high to just sit and watch. How many #1 overall QBs had the luxury of waiting a year? Not many, because they end up going to horrible teams.

#55 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,535 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:59 PM

The Rogers situation isnt similar. He wasn't the #1 overall pick and he had a hall of fame QB in front of him. Cam had to start there wasn't a better QB on the team and he was took too high to just sit and watch. How many #1 overall QBs had the luxury of waiting a year? Not many, because they end up going to horrible teams.


Newton could have had the option. The coaches chose not to give it to him because he gave them the best chance to win.

Again, short term vs long term.

#56 pepaw

pepaw

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 02:41 PM

No he's not, but I think he'd be a better guy than he is now if he'd sat for a year, as much as anything because I believe it would have negated the switch to the read option this season and better prepared him for all those new things he's being asked to do.

The atmosphere of the league these days is that long term benefits get sacrificed for short term ones.

I'd much rather Newton had been treated like the Niners treated Colin Kaepernick (with the exception of his starting from day one of year two).



We were running the read option last year mid season with great success. I don't really agree with the assessment that we "switched" to it this year. It's just that Chud failed to realize how teams would adapt to it so quickly.

I wish the offense would work on more of the short and intermediate routes to get Cam in a rhythm early. It would have also helped for when our offensive line struggled.

My biggest gripe about Chud has been his failure to realize how quickly nfl defenses would adapt to a 60 year old run scheme mainly in used in high schools.

#57 pepaw

pepaw

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 02:44 PM

And to answer Mr. Scot's original question, I really don't know.

#58 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,809 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 03:27 PM

Just for keeping score Mr. Scot's only mentioning this because he argued in favor of benching rookie QBs before Newton's record-breaking season and is now bringing this up because the simple fact that our team is struggling and Kaepernick had a good game regardless of the details gives him an opportunity to attack this from a new, unique, yet myopic angle.

#59 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,759 posts

Posted 23 November 2012 - 04:31 PM

answering the OP....

NO.

1) you don't sit a QB you draft in the first or second round UNLESS there is already a QB entrenched in the job already. this is especially true with the way rookie contracts are constructed now. you have to figure out if they can handle the pressures early. if they can't, they probably won't down the road.

2) cam is one of the majority of people on the planet who learn best by experience...with practical application of things learned and live bullets being thrown at you....and no, i wouldn't have a surgeon operating on me without him going through years of study before picking up a knife, but then i'm not asking for a QB to be a surgeon. it just ain't the same thing. (and i've seen that brought up in discussions about whether to sit a rookie QB or not)

3) how would cam sitting this year made things better this year? how would starting cam this year this year instead of last year make him better? i don't think it would and mainly because cam starting or not starting is the issue or the problem. it's the coaching. it's the playcalling. would cam be better off having been insulated from this cluserf*ck of a season? wouldn't all of us? i mean every panther player and every panther fan would have been better off if this season hadn't happened the way it did...but it did happen. with every disaster in life that happens, though...those effected have one simple decision to make, are you going to let this beat you or are you going to use this as an opportunity to grow. being insulated from life's poo fests doesn't make you any better in the long run. it just makes you inexperienced and probably ill-prepared for the next time the poo hits the fan.

i just don't like this hindsight crap and i think that the next coaching staff will be better than the crap we've had this year. and i absolutely think that this will have been a good experience for cam and the team mainly because he's gotten more experience under his belt, more tape for him to watch, more knowledge of what defenses are throwing at him, and more time with his receivers. he's earning his stripes. how is that not a good thing?

sorry....he's not going to be like some david carr, and if he does turn into some sort of shell shocked fragile psyche carrbon coy or some VY headcase that runs away and makes everyone think he's suicidal, then isn't it better that we find out earlier rather than later? i don't think that's the case, tho.

oh....and would DA have done better as the starter this year or last year? nope. would chud have run things differently? probably. would he have run things better? doubt it...at least not his second year. remember what happened with his offense in cleveland. the first year it was pretty spectacular and was good enough to send a couple guys to the pro-bowl, including DA. what did he do the next year? he saw what worked and then tried doing something completely different. he out-thinks himself and the team. i don't think we knew how much of a problem it was. now we know. that's what chud does. he makes something brilliant one year and then destroys it the next. cam had nothing to do with that. he's a victim just like the rest of the team. it happened. move on.

#60 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,535 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 23 November 2012 - 05:14 PM

answering the OP....

NO.

1) you don't sit a QB you draft in the first or second round UNLESS there is already a QB entrenched in the job already. this is especially true with the way rookie contracts are constructed now. you have to figure out if they can handle the pressures early. if they can't, they probably won't down the road.


You do if you have someone who can be a placeholder. That was Chris Chandler for McNair. Anderson could have been that for Newton too. And I disagree with the whole "if they can't start now, they never will" notion.

2) cam is one of the majority of people on the planet who learn best by experience...with practical application of things learned and live bullets being thrown at you....and no, i wouldn't have a surgeon operating on me without him going through years of study before picking up a knife, but then i'm not asking for a QB to be a surgeon. it just ain't the same thing. (and i've seen that brought up in discussions about whether to sit a rookie QB or not)


Football is one of those arenas where not all experience is good experience. This year is a prime example of that.

3) how would cam sitting this year made things better this year? how would starting cam this year this year instead of last year make him better? i don't think it would and mainly because cam starting or not starting is the issue or the problem. it's the coaching. it's the playcalling. would cam be better off having been insulated from this cluserf*ck of a season? wouldn't all of us? i mean every panther player and every panther fan would have been better off if this season hadn't happened the way it did...but it did happen. with every disaster in life that happens, though...those effected have one simple decision to make, are you going to let this beat you or are you going to use this as an opportunity to grow. being insulated from life's poo fests doesn't make you any better in the long run. it just makes you inexperienced and probably ill-prepared for the next time the poo hits the fan.


Reasons already listed prior.

i just don't like this hindsight crap and i think that the next coaching staff will be better than the crap we've had this year. and i absolutely think that this will have been a good experience for cam and the team mainly because he's gotten more experience under his belt, more tape for him to watch, more knowledge of what defenses are throwing at him, and more time with his receivers. he's earning his stripes. how is that not a good thing?

sorry....he's not going to be like some david carr, and if he does turn into some sort of shell shocked fragile psyche carrbon coy or some VY headcase that runs away and makes everyone think he's suicidal, then isn't it better that we find out earlier rather than later? i don't think that's the case, tho.

oh....and would DA have done better as the starter this year or last year? nope. would chud have run things differently? probably. would he have run things better? doubt it...at least not his second year. remember what happened with his offense in cleveland. the first year it was pretty spectacular and was good enough to send a couple guys to the pro-bowl, including DA. what did he do the next year? he saw what worked and then tried doing something completely different. he out-thinks himself and the team. i don't think we knew how much of a problem it was. now we know. that's what chud does. he makes something brilliant one year and then destroys it the next. cam had nothing to do with that. he's a victim just like the rest of the team. it happened. move on.


We don't really know that the next coaching staff's going to be better though, do we?

I don't really care whether last year would have been better or not. I sincerely doubt it. But yes, I believe that Newton would have been better off with a year of adjustment and preparation.

For the record, I went into this thread not expecting anyone to agree, but it's what I believe, and for reasons I've already explained.

Will we ever know? No. But it's what I think.

And I believe most coaches given the choice would rather bring a guy along slowly, but the nature of the game today is that many can't afford to do that. And young guys pay the price.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.