Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

I think our secondary could be historically bad


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#46 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,964 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 08:44 AM

We took the secondary that finished up the year playing well and added more experience and competition. What would make you think it will be so much worse? Norman can only get better

#47 MHS831

MHS831

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,900 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 08:45 AM

Let me attempt to understand this logic....

Norman will not be a rookie and now has experience.
Thomas was successful and is still very young, looking to build on a solid season.
Dockery played very well.
Munnerlyn is coming into his prime and was solid at nickel.
Moore can play S or nickel, giving us a ball hawk at either spot.

Godfrey sucked at SS but was better at FS.
Campbell is no longer a rookie and has valuable experience now.
Mitchell is a hard-hitting SS, something we lacked in 2012, who can start.
Nakamura and Martin will not be starting.

Our defensive front is about to show the NFL how to pressure the passer. QBs will no longer be able to easily step up into the pocket. Hardy and CJ and Alexander are young, experienced, and hungry.

How do you expect the secondary to be worse? This is what Gettlemen was talking about. You have to let your players develop--sometimes, the answer to the need can be found on your roster.

Take a look at some of the talent that was allowed to develop here, and talent that was not.
Charles Johnson, Greg Hardy. Both struggled early. What if we brought in a veteran or high draft pick to replace them after their rookie years?
What about Evan Mathis?

This secondary will improve in 2013. Maybe not where we want it to be, but it will be a lot better.

#48 PantherGuy

PantherGuy

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 793 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 28 April 2013 - 08:49 AM

Gettleman said in a press conference not too long ago that he wasn't worried about the secondary. From the outside, our secondary doesn't look too good, but I trust Gettleman. He knows about 1000x more about our team than I do.

#49 Match.com

Match.com

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,376 posts
  • LocationPhiladelphia, PA

Posted 28 April 2013 - 08:53 AM

Downer thread

#50 chknwing

chknwing

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,571 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 08:54 AM

This guy gets it.

After holing up and watching film our Gm, a 26 year pro-personel guy, said he didn't see any glaring holes on this team. I think I trust that assessment. It's not like an ex-beat writer made that statement.



So does that mean the team is filled with underachievers?

#51 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,307 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:11 AM

Gettleman said in a press conference not too long ago that he wasn't worried about the secondary. From the outside, our secondary doesn't look too good, but I trust Gettleman. He knows about 1000x more about our team than I do.


What would he say if our secondary was poo and was a worry? He would pimp the guys exactly like he is now...acting like there are guys here who can play until it gets fixed



#52 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,583 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:17 AM

I have heard from more than one Panthers employee that Josh Norman had a lot to do with why they were not concerned as much with CB. Early word is he took his benching the right way, ie motivation to get it back.


There was only one problem with Norman and its very correctable. I didn't/don't see the need for CB.

#53 PantherGuy

PantherGuy

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 793 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:18 AM

I think are "D" is going be historically good


Might be a bit overly optimistic, but I like the optimism nonetheless. It's refreshing.

#54 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,583 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:18 AM

So does that mean the team is filled with underachievers?


Fill with? No.

But coaching had a lot to do with the losses.

#55 PantherGuy

PantherGuy

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 793 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:19 AM

What would he say if our secondary was poo and was a worry? He would pimp the guys exactly like he is now...acting like there are guys here who can play until it gets fixed


I'll agree to disagree.

#56 PantherGuy

PantherGuy

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 793 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:24 AM

Let me attempt to understand this logic....

Norman will not be a rookie and now has experience.
Thomas was successful and is still very young, looking to build on a solid season.
Dockery played very well.
Munnerlyn is coming into his prime and was solid at nickel.
Moore can play S or nickel, giving us a ball hawk at either spot.

Godfrey sucked at SS but was better at FS.
Campbell is no longer a rookie and has valuable experience now.
Mitchell is a hard-hitting SS, something we lacked in 2012, who can start.
Nakamura and Martin will not be starting.

Our defensive front is about to show the NFL how to pressure the passer. QBs will no longer be able to easily step up into the pocket. Hardy and CJ and Alexander are young, experienced, and hungry.

How do you expect the secondary to be worse? This is what Gettlemen was talking about. You have to let your players develop--sometimes, the answer to the need can be found on your roster.

Take a look at some of the talent that was allowed to develop here, and talent that was not.
Charles Johnson, Greg Hardy. Both struggled early. What if we brought in a veteran or high draft pick to replace them after their rookie years?
What about Evan Mathis?

This secondary will improve in 2013. Maybe not where we want it to be, but it will be a lot better.


This really should be good enough. But it seems some Huddlers want a perfect team, which is just not possible to put together. The secondary will be good enough.

#57 CPF4LIFE

CPF4LIFE

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,610 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:30 AM

I think out run D will be better.

Pass D will be an issue with what we have right now....when the rush doesn't get there. Pass rush wasn't an issue last year. Not realistic for the rush to get there enough to mask our lack of talent for a season.



Thats an issue for every team.

#58 CardiacCats

CardiacCats

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,384 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 09:58 AM

I mean I hope you guys are right and they did look okay down the stretch last year, but I'm still really concerned about them.

#59 CRA

CRA

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,307 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 10:03 AM

Thats an issue for every team.


What happened in games like Chicago, Tampa, Atl aren't...

Zero pressure is a problem....but if we simply allow decent passes to be thrown we got picked apart. Pass rush was freakish at times last year and that is why we survived. Asking your rush to be even better for an entire season is really playing with fire.

#60 mjligon

mjligon

    REAL TALK ----->

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,986 posts

Posted 28 April 2013 - 10:04 AM

I knew I could count on a thread like this to piss me off this morning.


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.