Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Interesting interview with Mike Tannenbaum on Sirius today.


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#141 koolkatluke

koolkatluke

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,847
  • Reputation: 474
  • LocationNonya
HUDDLER

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:37 AM

The offense cost us several games too. Yea ALOT of that was Chud but also our WR's(Murphy in particular) cost us with some key drops. Hixon is an upgrade over Murphy if he stays healthy. I would just like to see Steve on the field for a year or 2 with a Hopkins or Hunter to mentor and get ready to be the guy instead of having to come in as a rookie when Steve is gone. What I meant about Dt is it's easier to find a cheaper one in FA that can be your 1 or 2 if you have to than a WR. Unless we're going to fork out for Lloyd, which I just don't see. It does seem like the Panthers are trying to trade back so I think we can address both. If we took one of your 1st or 2n rd DT's and got Hopkins/Hunter and a good CB/S would you really consider that a bad draft?


The offense cost us 2 games and none of that was the WR's fault.

1st Tampa Game was Chud's bad Game plan and giving up on the run way to early.

2nd Seattle where our RB's fumbled on our side of the field giving easy scores to the Seahawks. Then Cam missed a wide open Hardstock in the endzone..

Neither of those loses were our WR's fault.

#142 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,126
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:40 AM

Wrong again.

Out of the 12 teams to make the playoffs this year.

3 of the top 5 defenses made it and 3 of the top 5 offenses made it. It was 5 and 6 when you look at the top 10 offense and defense. So the league is still split between good Offense and good defenses. And you can win with either one.

But we must not forget the 2 teams playing in the Superbowl were know more for their defense then their offense.


you are looking to argue....

It is an offensive game today...doesn't mean there aren't examples of teams doing well with good Ds. The offensive teams are the consistant good teams though overall.




oh, and the Ravens being known as a defensive team didn't make them one in 2012. There D was middle of the road. Big names who no longer played big.

#143 koolkatluke

koolkatluke

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,847
  • Reputation: 474
  • LocationNonya
HUDDLER

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:47 AM

you are looking to argue....

It is an offensive game today...doesn't mean there aren't examples of teams doing well.






oh, and the Ravens being known as a defensive team didn't make them one in 2012. There D was middle of the road. Big names who no longer played big.


And so was their offense being ranked 16th. But we both know the only reason they were middle of the road defensively. Is they had injuries to their top defenders most of the year. Webb,Lewis,Suggs, and Naga all missed games.

#144 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,126
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:51 AM

And so was their offense being ranked 16th. But we both know the only reason they were middle of the road defensively. Is they had injuries to their top defenders most of the year. Webb,Lewis,Suggs, and Naga all missed games.



Ray Lewis and Ed Reed were just old....simple and plain. Them aging out was big....as they where the core of what made them a defensive terror squad.

Those other guys now without Lewis and Reed....aren't the defensive squad Baltimore was known for years ago.

Finding a balanced team that had success doesn't mean it hasn't become an offensive driven league....too many numbers back that.

#145 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,126
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:58 AM

but you know what....I don't even agree with what I am saying. So you are right.

It is a QB/Passing league now....just saying it is now an offensive league wouldn't be accurate.

#146 koolkatluke

koolkatluke

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,847
  • Reputation: 474
  • LocationNonya
HUDDLER

Posted 12 April 2013 - 10:09 AM

Offense cost as as well.....

and you can argue the secondary signifcantly more than our DTs is why our D lost us some of those games.....basically Nakamura/Norman.



1. Yes they did 2. And IMO most of that was on Chud's bullshit.

2. Oh really??? Now the secondary was bad but lets look at some of these loses closer.

1st Atl game -- Turner had 103 yards rushing on 13 carries. He hadn't had a 100 yard game until he played us. He only had 2 100 yard games all season.

2nd Tampa game ---- Doug Martin 138 yards on 24 carries. How many times did this hamster Gashed us this year??

3rd KC------ Jamaal Charles 127 yards on 27 carries. Charles was the reason we gave Brady F'n Quinn a career day.

Now lets look at how 2 undrafted RB's gashed us.

NYG --- Brown 20 carries 112 yards 2TD.
.
Philly ---- A game that was way to close when we should have blown them out. Reason way???
B. Brown 19 carries for a 178 yards and 2 td's thank god he had fumbleitus and our offense kept scoring. Because we could have lost that game.

So yes the DT's were a problem.

#147 koolkatluke

koolkatluke

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,847
  • Reputation: 474
  • LocationNonya
HUDDLER

Posted 12 April 2013 - 10:11 AM

but you know what....I don't even agree with what I am saying. So you are right.

It is a QB/Passing league now....just saying it is now an offensive league wouldn't be accurate.



Thank you.

#148 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 27,126
  • Reputation: 5,285
Moderators

Posted 12 April 2013 - 10:14 AM

1. Yes they did 2. And IMO most of that was on Chud's bullshit.

2. Oh really??? Now the secondary was bad but lets look at some of these loses closer.

1st Atl game -- Turner had 103 yards rushing on 13 carries. He hadn't had a 100 yard game until he played us. He only had 2 100 yard games all season.

2nd Tampa game ---- Doug Martin 138 yards on 24 carries. How many times did this hamster Gashed us this year??

3rd KC------ Jamaal Charles 127 yards on 27 carries. Charles was the reason we gave Brady F'n Quinn a career day.

Now lets look at how 2 undrafted RB's gashed us.

NYG --- Brown 20 carries 112 yards 2TD.
.
Philly ---- A game that was way to close when we should have blown them out. Reason way???
B. Brown 19 carries for a 178 yards and 2 td's thank god he had fumbleitus and our offense kept scoring. Because we could have lost that game.

So yes the DT's were a problem.

We where in position to win the Atl, Chi, and Tampa games with middle of the road play late from our secondary. Norman and Nakamura lost those.

A lot of the run damage isn't just the DT sucking. It wasnt in 2011 either. We have a lot of guys outside the DTs who have played the run poorly

#149 koolkatluke

koolkatluke

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,847
  • Reputation: 474
  • LocationNonya
HUDDLER

Posted 12 April 2013 - 10:20 AM

We where in position to win the Atl, Chi, and Tampa games with middle of the road play late from our secondary. Norman and Nakamura lost those.

A lot of the run damage isn't just the DT sucking. It wasnt in 2011 either. We have a lot of guys outside the DTs who have played the run poorly


I will agree with some of that but the DT position has been a major issues here for 3 years now.

Most of the top teams in the league have a playmaking DT. These are just facts. We can't take the next step to contending every year if we keep devaluing the DT position .

#150 Razeyfingers

Razeyfingers

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 10-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,665
  • Reputation: 807
HUDDLER

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:39 AM

NO AGAIN. We knew we had Moose for 1 more season when we took Keary. We have 1 year, 2 at most witth Steve. How is that not the same thing?

You act like number 3 WR's don't get snaps. They do. And IF/When our rookie shows more playmaking ability then Lafell he will earn more.

I don't consider Fua a starter. Even if we don't get another Dt he will be baten our by Cole and Kearse barring HUGE improvement on his part. There are still good vet DT's out there also who will be had on the cheap.

And yes I likr Thomas. Will he be the cover guy Gamble was maybe not, but I like his tackling and attitude better. Gamble was never a great tackler and played soft. You might want to rethink that part.

We brought in 2 vet corners and a safety. Not saying we shouldn't address those but we did add insurance. FA strong safeties are easy to find...Hello Marlon McCree..Chris Harris(trade yes but see the point?)Do you know who that is? haha jk

Again not saying not to address DT, secondary or OG. I just think it's ALOT easier to find guys to fill those holes in Free Agency than a WR with potential to be our number 1. We have been waiting for WR's to step up for YEARS now. I don't see how you could think Ginn and company is going to do something they've never done before. If you leave it as is Steve, Lafell and Hixon are your 3 wideoute and Steve is old, Lafell is inconsistent and Hixon is injury prone to boot. Yes we could strike gold with one of our scrubs but I could also win the lottery. You pray for the best but plan for the worst. Losing Steve with out WR's as is will be the worst case scenario.


Dude what are you talking about? Colbert wasnt a first rounder first of all. I mean I dont even . . . Do you understand the question im asking you?


That is just a mad clutter of ideas thrown at a page with no point to it at all. What is your point here? Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing, lol. Look man, its simple, you dont draft a guy at 14 to not start at 1 or 2. . . period. What is all this wall of text? You're just rambling nonsense about how we need a WR badly arent you? Read it. Ghead and tell me where it suggests that it is common for teams to pick a WR in our situation. Let me explain the givens for you since you dont get it: Smith and LaFell are starters and will get most of the snaps.

You keep repeating the same thing as the other guys. Smith is old, LaFell isnt good enough. Thats all im getting out of this.

Gamble was an incredible open field tackler for a cornerback, for any Panther's fan to say that tells me you dont know the sport. Go read some details about Gamble from your favorite website since you dont have eyeballs to see for yourself. This is probably the worst comment Ive ever read about him. You couldnt be farther from the truth. It was one of his strengths.



...and why are you saying its easier to fill those spots in FA, because you said so? lol yeah thats not how it works. The risk is the same whether you draft a rookie or a vet. There are different variables but the risk is still there even if you decide to ignore drafting at your spot.


I wont continue to keep repeating myself . . . thats my last post on this topic, dude. You obviously dont understand:

1) That we have two starters already and anyone we bring in will get limited snaps
2) Any DT will get lots of snaps because we will put him right in
3) NO TEAM has ever drafted a guy at 14 or higher to sit behind the 1 and 2 on their roster already.
4) Cornerbacks are half the size of most of the players on the field. Just because Gamble never lifted someone in the air and tossed them back 10 yards doesnt mean he's not a good tackler.


I dont even know what to say about your comment it was so full of bullsht.Gamble had a bad attitude too? Does Smitty have a good attitude then? how about Jake and Cam, do they have bad attitudes? Boy your a big authority on attitudes and tackling then arent you. Tell me how Gambles attitude was bad. He was always causing distraction in the media huh?

Look at yourself man, is this what you came here for? To pretend to more than anyone else? Im here trying to reign you idiots in and tell you to consider all your options. Obviously we need defensive players. Obviously we have a coach that is in a hot seat that need to win now not next year when our new WR has developed. . . AND obviously we have two starters at the WR position.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users