Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Gettleman expected to release Gamble


  • Please log in to reply
115 replies to this topic

#106 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 26,275 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:10 PM

Im surprised that so many of you read past the strategy like this. "Oh well we were fine without him", yeah we were fine when we game planned without him a couple of times, but then again there were teams that exploited the poo out of it and thats what going to happen next year if we lose him. It will be a catastrophe in the secondary if he leaves. . . . . Bet that!

Good coaches will look at our D and go '. . soft spot. . . soft spot . soft spot. . . OH they have no corners who can cover and no safety to save them. Buh bye Panthers, a lttle run run play-action and boom goes the dynamite. '


You have to look at the causes and effects, not just the additions and subtractions of the equation. Good strategists adjust and use the tools they have, thats how battles are won. Without 2O, our strategy is going to press as much as you can with the front 7 and when that fails. . . we're fugged.


Gamble played in 4 games....it isn't like we adjusted for 2 games.

They had all season to do what you claimed....our D go better

#107 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,194 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:35 PM

Gamble played in 4 games....it isn't like we adjusted for 2 games.

They had all season to do what you claimed....our D go better

yep.

again, we weren't any better or worse off with or without him, and this team has had plenty of time to get used to it.

he played last year and the defense was bad. he sat for most of the season and the defense was good. not saying he was the problem, just that he didn't impact things much on or off the field.

he is essentially just a guy. talented, but still just a guy.

#108 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,654 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:49 PM

Gamble played in 4 games....it isn't like we adjusted for 2 games.

They had all season to do what you claimed....our D go better


we were 7 and 9. . what are you trying to say here?

edit: . . I mean odds n probabilities roll the way they will CRA, the dice fell and thats how they came out this year, but you are seriously putting stress on Ron to game plan without Gamble.


Double edit: you guys talk about how we were ok... yeah, ok we were in some situations but that didnt make the threat of getting OWNED in the secondary any less of a reality

#109 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 26,275 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 06:49 PM

we were 7 and 9. . what are you trying to say here?

edit: . . I mean odds n probabilities roll the way they will CRA, the dice fell and thats how they came out this year, but you are seriously putting stress on Ron to game plan without Gamble.


Double edit: you guys talk about how we were ok... yeah, ok we were in some situations but that didnt make the threat of getting OWNED in the secondary any less of a reality


Team sport. That is what records say...

He game planned without him this year.....majority of the year. Again, better without him. Ron can coach up a dang D.

He didn't make bad defensive calls.....he lacked the talent to execute some pretty standard assignments.

Gamble is good. He doesn't make or break anything as has been shown with both Fox and Rivera.

#110 magnus

magnus

    Eternal Gameface

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,309 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:08 PM

It's amazing how being benched for a game makes "Gamble's 2010: Benched." Look at PFF for his 2010. His QB rating and overall stats from 2010 and 2011 were essentially identical. Guy was good this year too (lowest yards per route run for the year when he got hurt).
Then again, the Observer does the same thing. "Hurt two out of the last three years" for missing a couple of games in 2010 as well.

I don't know. To me, not being targeted all season is better than turning the ball over 4 times, but people have always kinda crapped on Gamble for not having gaudy INT stats. He's not irreplaceable, but it's amazing how fans and media have both just written the guy off without even suggesting he might add a year or two to his contract and simply stay. Gross is in essentially the same situation - saves more to cut than Gamble, actually - and is three years older. Has anyone ever just assumed Gross would be cut? Not really. Yet, every two-bit amateur writer will automatically assume Gamble is done.

#111 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 26,275 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:49 PM

It's amazing how being benched for a game makes "Gamble's 2010: Benched." Look at PFF for his 2010. His QB rating and overall stats from 2010 and 2011 were essentially identical. Guy was good this year too (lowest yards per route run for the year when he got hurt).
Then again, the Observer does the same thing. "Hurt two out of the last three years" for missing a couple of games in 2010 as well.

I don't know. To me, not being targeted all season is better than turning the ball over 4 times, but people have always kinda crapped on Gamble for not having gaudy INT stats. He's not irreplaceable, but it's amazing how fans and media have both just written the guy off without even suggesting he might add a year or two to his contract and simply stay. Gross is in essentially the same situation - saves more to cut than Gamble, actually - and is three years older. Has anyone ever just assumed Gross would be cut? Not really. Yet, every two-bit amateur writer will automatically assume Gamble is done.


Gross plays a more important position....and has diversity.

Most important player is Cam....and that makes the OL VERY important going forward. Take Kalil out of the conversation and if Gross isn't there you could argue we don't have another player of starting caliber

#112 Cpt slay a ho

Cpt slay a ho

    Lord Flacko

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,350 posts
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:54 PM

hate the move but it's gotta happen to get us back on track, but to say he wasn't good for us is foolish if gamble played the whole 2012 we would be in the playoffs i know there's a couple of games we needed a veteran presnece in the secondary(chicago,alanta,bucs)he's been a reliable player point blank before this year roddy white has never gotten 100 yards against us and pretty sure there's a couple wr he's looked down in our division.I hope he restructures but if not let the new age begin with thomas,norman,cap or a draft pick at #1 Cb

#113 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,654 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:05 AM

. .
Gamble is good. He doesn't make or break anything as has been shown with both Fox and Rivera.



and I dont have any problem with that statement. It just another hole in an already soft secondary. It would be nice if we could find that cap money to keep him. The dude can remove star receivers from games when he's fully healthy. There are very few shutdown corners in the league, Gamble is one of them. It isnt easy being undersized in every matchup, its hard to stay healthy and not many can maintain like that.

#114 BelgianPantherFan

BelgianPantherFan

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 496 posts
  • LocationBelgium

Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:59 AM

I'm pretty sure that with the money that we save from cutting Gamble, we can improve our D more than keeping him. That's how you should look at this. Decision that just has to be made, unfortunately.

#115 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,654 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 04:50 PM

Well Gamble has won me over as a fan for life no matter where he goes if we do part ways. I think he's an unbelievably rare and talented athlete and Im never going to retire his jersey from my closet. I still think Ron is going to push to save him.

Free agency is going to be competitive. No teams really have cap space anymore because of the rules change. Idk, I hope it works out for us and Gamble.

#116 Firefox

Firefox

    This Board Rocks

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 797 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:38 PM

Free agency is going to be competitive. No teams really have cap space anymore because of the rules change. Idk, I hope it works out for us and Gamble.


Bengals ($53.5 million under the cap -Phelan M. Ebenhack/Associated Press), Dolphins, Browns, Colts, Bucs, Jags, Titans, Bills, Patriots, etc. say "Hi !!!!".

http://www.nfl.com/


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com