Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jtnc

Cam wants a run game

181 posts in this topic

The Panthers need a balanced attack. Beyond that they need to target opponents weaknesses. Have you ever seen an offensive coordinator abuse a rookie? Or a vet with a bum hamstring? I can't remember that ever happening in Carolina.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beyond that they need to target opponents weaknesses. Have you ever seen an offensive coordinator abuse a rookie? Or a vet with a bum hamstring? I can't remember that ever happening in Carolina.

 

Well this starts with the head coach. Rivera has to get more aggressive and coach with some balls.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Panthers need a balanced attack. Beyond that they need to target opponents weaknesses. Have you ever seen an offensive coordinator abuse a rookie? Or a vet with a bum hamstring? I can't remember that ever happening in Carolina.

Although Smoot wasn't a rookie, I think Smitty abused him pretty good.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

abuse is an understatement to what smith did to him that day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone who knows what Rivera and Gettleman talk about every day can keep telling us who is doing what and we will believe them.  The rest of you keep arguing about something you have no clue about.  It is correct that GM's are over coaches and they typically can pretty much do and say anything they want within reason. Based on the what I have read and seen, I  assume that Gettleman will have final say on all matters and can get as involved in gameplanning and decision making as he wants. But exactly what Gettleman and Rivera's role are now and will become based on whether we win or lose remains to be seen.  I bet they don't even know what exactly they will do in the Fall right now?  So anyone saying they know absolutely how it is or who will do what,  are speculating at best.

 

carry on..................

 

so what is the success rate of a GM getting involved with game planning and how often has it happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what is the success rate of a GM getting involved with game planning and how often has it happened?

 

GM's don't get involved with the gameplanning.  They hire coaches that run the system they want run.  What they might do is make suggestions for what they want, such as a particular player needs to be more or less involved or the offense needs to be more balanced.  But they don't actually get into the specific gameplanning...quite frankly, no GM has the time (and for the most part expertise) to get particularly deep into the specifics of what the coach is or isn't doing.  That's why they hire the guy that's going to do what they want without having to micro manage. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM's don't get involved with the gameplanning.  They hire coaches that run the system they want run.  What they might do is make suggestions for what they want, such as a particular player needs to be more or less involved or the offense needs to be more balanced.  But they don't actually get into the specific gameplanning...quite frankly, no GM has the time (and for the most part expertise) to get particularly deep into the specifics of what the coach is or isn't doing.  That's why they hire the guy that's going to do what they want without having to micro manage. 

 

i know, that was my point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what is the success rate of a GM getting involved with game planning and how often has it happened?

Ricardson got involved with the gameplanning so why wouldn't the GM.  What most of you confuse is gameplanning with playcalling or designing plays.

Richardson said stop running the read option and go to a more traditional running game.  That is gameplanning.

It isn't micromanagement or designing plays for a particular game but there is more than 1 kind of gameplanning. It isn't gameplanning like looking a particular defense and designing plays to beat that.  Frankly head coaches don't do that either much of the time.  Coordinators do.  But in the sense that the GM is in control of the big picture they do tell the coach what they want to see and the head coach tells the coordinator what they want to see. That is giving directions and gameplanning but in a more global sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM's don't get involved with the gameplanning.  They hire coaches that run the system they want run.  What they might do is make suggestions for what they want, such as a particular player needs to be more or less involved or the offense needs to be more balanced.  But they don't actually get into the specific gameplanning...quite frankly, no GM has the time (and for the most part expertise) to get particularly deep into the specifics of what the coach is or isn't doing.  That's why they hire the guy that's going to do what they want without having to micro manage. 

Your line 3 is gameplanning.  Head coaches don't micromanage either but they do help the coordinator with the game plan just like Rivera did  in 2012.  Depends on the level of game planning you are talking about.  But to say they don;t get involved in not likely true.  The issue is how involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When and where did Richardson say stop running the read option. I missed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When and where did Richardson say stop running the read option. I missed it.

 

 

Yeah, I want to see a link to this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ricardson got involved with the gameplanning so why wouldn't the GM.  What most of you confuse is gameplanning with playcalling or designing plays.

Richardson said stop running the read option and go to a more traditional running game.  That is gameplanning.

It isn't micromanagement or designing plays for a particular game but there is more than 1 kind of gameplanning. It isn't gameplanning like looking a particular defense and designing plays to beat that.  Frankly head coaches don't do that either much of the time.  Coordinators do.  But in the sense that the GM is in control of the big picture they do tell the coach what they want to see and the head coach tells the coordinator what they want to see. That is giving directions and gameplanning but in a more global sense.

 

i never knew that a GM determines what philosophy a coach decides to run. he is in control of the bigger picture as far as personnel on the team wise, but i do not believe he insist in over stepping his boundries. i have a hard time of seeing Thompson, Reese, Smith, Ozzie or any successful GM getting involved with game planning.  and if richardson is involved in game planning, no wonder we havent won many games in the last 4 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites