I may be off on this, but it seems to me, undoubtedly due to busts in times past, that speed, and specifically 40 timed speed, is starting to be underrated.
For years and years it was overrated, a lot of that was due to Al Davis and his drafting, was due to drooling over how fast a player could run in his underwear, and other things.
In response to this overrating of 40 times, it seems we (fans, scouts, GM's) have started to go the other way.
Five years ago If Perriman runs a 4.2 he goes from fringe first rounder to at least being picked somewhere between 15-20. That's silly.
This year, he's still a fringe first rounder. Despite all this talk he hasn't moved up. If anything this 4.2 has hurt him. "Well he doesn't look this fast on tape" "who cares that he's fast, he can't catch". This is also silly, not equally silly perhaps, but silly nonetheless.
He ran a 4.2. It's not a huge deal, but it's a big one. It's shouldn't put him in the top 20, but it should put him in the first.
The reason he's not moved up is because GM's are scared. And I get it. Who wants to draft the next Ted Ginn, Stephen Hill, DHB etc?
He's a fast WR with Questionable hands: he could be Stephen Hill, but he could be Torrey Smith, who many on this board were clamoring for.
He could be DHB or he could be Mike Wallace, who in times past many on this board was clamoring for.
Who knows. I certainly don't, but I did want to take the time to say to Breshard Perriman, congrats, you ran a 4.2, that's still something special in my book, and I get the sense that Al Davis is somewhere with two thumbs up, agreeing with me.
When the statement, "if the play works you look like a genius and if it doesn't, you're a fool" is made, 9 times out of ten I agree, but not this time.
It was bad all the way around. If the play was a completion I would have said something along the lines of, "wow, that was a stupid risk to take." Not, "Dang Pete Carroll is ballsy".
I wonder if the thought of being "ballsy" went into the decision.
Fake field goal in the NFC championship game -- Ballsy!
Go for a TD with only 6 seconds left in the half -- Ballsy!
Throw a pass on 2nd and goal to win the SUPERBOWL -- hubris/stupid/unexplainable.
And you don't not run the ball because NE will be expecting it. Who cares? What is it with this game lately that coaches think outsmarting or a more accurate word for this line of thinking, tricking, your opponent is the best way to go?
Outsmarting an opponent is part of this game, a bigger part is lining up and smashing helmets, Seattle has proved time and again that they can do that well, and so you do it even if the other team knows it's coming.
Isn't that the mark of a great opponent, when you know what they're going to do but still can't stop it?
And just because they ran it doesn't mean it had to be some Shula straight up the gut play.
Run a toss, a sweep, a stretch play, the read option, something!
And someone brought up the stat that I also saw elsewhere that Lynch was 1 for 5 in scoring from the one yard line this year:
1. That's a very small sample size.
2. It was second down so running it 3 more times would surely increase the odds.
But the point OP was making is that the performance Wilson displayed in today's game was worst than any game Cam played this year except for maybe home against NO...and his team STILL won...in the conf. championship game...against the best QB in the day...
I been thinking about this, but the idea isn't fully fleshed out so feel free to poke holes in it...
Their seems to be two ways to build a team: balance; both sides of the ball being good, or one side of the ball being elite and the other being average.
I believe that this team is built to be elite on one side of the ball and above average/average on the other. In fact I think if you took the best OC in the league and put him on our team I don't think we'd reach the "good" level, (offensive ranking: 1-5 elite, 5-10 good, 10-14 above avg., 14-18 avg, 18-23 below avg, 23-27 bad, 27-32 terrible). Why? B/c most of our talent is on the other side of the football.
We have no elite players on O, 1 if you count Olsen this year. We have 4 good players. Cam, Kalil, KB and healthy Stew. Everyone else is average or unproven.
We have 2 elite players on D at least; Davis and Luke. We had 3 with Hardy last year, and 4 when Johnson is healthy. Then we have players in Star, KK, Dwan, Norman who I would consider as good. This is a notable difference.
Their is no team in the league that is elite on both sides of the ball, it's nearly impossible.
Their are rarely any teams that are elite on one side of the ball and good on the other (depending on what type stats you use)
So you usually have 3 types of contending teams...
Elite on O, above avg/avg on D -- Colts/Packers/Pats
Elite on D, above avg/avg on O --
Good on both-- Dallas, Baltimore (Super Bowl year)
Now as Gettlemen stated, he believes defense when championships, so it seems to me, though we will get Cam help on the offensive side of the ball, we will continue to make sure our defense has the opportunity to be elite.
This idea is why I think some of the Shula hate is unwarranted...some. He is average and sometimes below average, but as I stated earlier if someone new was brought in, he'd wouldn't get us to the "good" level. The only way to get us to "good" is to draft good players on offense.
Which gets us to the question presented by the OP. And the answer is Jimmy's and Joes.
Chuck Pagano's defense stinks (at least it did in the reg. season) but why? He was a defensive coordinator? It's because the Jimmys and Joes are all on the offensive side of the ball.
Jim Harbaugh is an offensive mind, but it's the defense that had him in 3 consecutive conf. Championship games. Why? B/c Willis, Bowman, and the Smith bros don't play offense.
Bill belicheat is a defensive mind yet the Patroits have been known for their offense for the last decade.
Did Dick Lebeau forget how to coach defense or did the Steelers start to invest more on Offense side of the ball, as well as Troy P and James Harrison slowing down.
In summary X's and O's can take you one level up, from terrible to bad or average to above average. But players can take your from bad to elite. We saw it here in one offseason.
We went from a horrible offense in 2010 to a good one in 2011, and it wasn't because of Chud, it was because of Cam.
Lastly just think about the differences in the process of finding a new coach vs drafting new players. Organizations take a couple weeks to find their coach of the future, but for the draft they take months, employing dozens of scouts and sending them all around the country to find the right Jimmy's and Joe's. I think that shows which one is deemed more vital.
An elite coach can't make a bad team look good. Aka: Bill Belichiek wouldn't have Jacksonville in the playoffs.
But an elite roster can make a bad coach look good... Mike Smith a couple years ago..
I think that our underwhelming WR corp hurts Shula's success as a play caller,
But I also think Shula's lack of play design creativity exasperates the problem.
I think our horrible Oline for most of the season handcuffed Shula b/c it hindered our run game which is the foundation of our offense,
But I also think Shula's read option calls in the wrong situations and the long developing pass plays made the offensive line look worse than it already was.
In other words I think Shula is average. If we have an elite defense to go along with his averageness, like last year and the end of this one, we can win. But if the defense slips at all, we're in trouble.
I don't get it. I'm a self-professed Cam nut hugger and I have no problem saying Luck and Wilson are at this point better than Cam.
He doesn't have to be best young QB in the game to be real good.
Truly all I care about is the Panthers being better than the Colts or Seahawks in the long run.
That being sad, threads like these that seem to rag on Luck or Wilson come about b/c Cam bashers nit pick everything thing Cam does as if Luck doesnt overthrow open receivers too, or Manning for that matter. So I definitely understand the tone of this thread.
Ps: and part of it is they we are Panther fans, it's natural and appropriate to be biased towards Cam. He's our QB after all
I don't buy that's fans actually root for their team to lose during the game. Instinct and emotion take over at some point and you root for your team.
Let's say that next week we're up by six points against the Saints, it's fourth and goal with 7 seconds left and Drew Brees has the ball at our 8 yard line. You mean to tell me that there are people on this board that would be actively rooting for Brees to throw a TD? How is that possible? The look on Sean Payton's smug face as they kick the go ahead extra point would have me sick for a week.
I understand the desire to have a higher draft pick and more importantly, to be rid of Rivera and company, but I don't think I'm capable of rooting against my team. It's third and short and I'm at home hoping Stewart gets stuffed on the LOS. Not possible.
Now once we've lost the game and everything's over, I of course get to be in the position of looking at the silver linings, a higher draft pick, Rivera gone etc. But these are things that console me after a loss. Not something I'm considering during the game.
I don't mean to imply that those who prefer us lose out are bad fans. You're thinking about what benefits the team best long term. I get it. But as much as I want Rivera gone, what I wanted more was for Cam to come out in the second half today and brings up back for a victory. I want us to win.