top dawg

Even if you don't see it as a must-win game, you have to acknowledge that the Huddle will implode, and it will probably be appropriate.

I have tried to be neutral about David Newton, and it's not in my nature to berate journalists following the team (so it kind of pains me to say this), but now I'm on the Newton-is-an-idiot train.

I understand why people say that, and IMO it's very easy to say, but irrespective of the teams, week one is just as important as any other game. If you lose week one and miss the playoffs by a game, then it counts just as much as all the rest of the losses.

Honestly, neither the Teddy or Darnold acquisition was "baffling" to me. What was baffling regarding Teddy was the money & structure of the contract. I like the Darnold acquisition (even if the 2nd was a tad too high IMO). What I didn't like was them skipping over Fields. That was kind of "baffling" to me, notwithstanding Darnold. But, I know why they probably did it, in part because of Darnold (which may be confusing, I don't know). I hope that it works out. But, if it doesn't, they deserve all the criticism that they get.

LOL at "...the right furniture."

Cam wasn't that bad. We know who the good teams are. KC, Rams, Packers, Ravens, Titans, Steelers, Seahawks, Bucs...we just don't know who the surprise good teams are.

I trust Igo enough to take his word for it. In general though, this BR article just doesn't square with anything I've read/heard from anyone that's been to practice.

Hearing all the positivity about Fields and Trey Lance is beginning to make me wonder about Rhule's, Brady's and Fit's QB scouting abilities (not to mention that they were reportedly high on Wilson). The only thing that is keeping my mouth shut is the good things that I'm hearing about Darnold. That, and the fact that live bullets haven't started flying yet. It's still early, but damn.

We have CMC, Moore, Anderson, Arnold, and Joe Brady, and you think that all we can put up is 17 measly points? Nah, man, I predict 34 to 9.

If we can't beat a team with a brand new staff, rookie QB, a suspect O-line and suspect offensive skill players, then who the hell can we beat (with all these shiny new toys)? And I'll add that Rhule and company pushed their chips in on Darnold.

Who was the Jets' QB for those victories? That's rhetorical!

OK, some of you may not agree, and perhaps I'm being hyperbolic in a literal sense, because it's just a game (season opener, no less), but there's no way that we can lose to the Jets and good things happen. We have to beat the Jets, period! New staff, and new QB, with a decidedly less talented offense. This is a must-win! Now I really think that there's no way we should lose, especially considering that the new boy wonder of New York City is not quite living up to great expectations in camp--i.e., he's looking like a lost rookie that is presently in no way prepared for the speed of the game; lose to him and that unstable organization, and our atmosphere here will become just as volatile as the Jets' may become very shortly. Our opening game won't be the Hot Seat Bowl because one staff is new and one is relatively new, but it will be the Hot Potato Bowl, and that hot potato represents volatility. You catch it, and the atmosphere surrounding your franchise will become potentially explosive, even if it's just a slow burn that leads to a big boom at some given point in the future. The Panthers really don't have any reason to lose. Sam Darnold, Rhule or anyone can say anything they want, but the crystal clear irony of the game, and something akin to the poetic justice of victory makes the Panthers' game against the Jets a must-win game in my eyes. What do you see?

Zach Wilson is and always was a nonstarter for me. The flavor of the month! I always thought Trey Lance was the better option, and I'm sticking to it. The more interesting question is whether we passed up on a potential franchise QB in Fields. By most accounts, he's looked pretty good so far. Darnold has as well. As long as they're on similar trajectories, we're good. As long as Horn balls out, we're good.

Yeah, I read that, but honestly I think the articles speak more to a quarterback being able to read defenses and make the appropriate decisions. It's all about Sam making the right decisions! The RPO or at least its elements are a part of the game for better or worse, unless you're an amazing processor in the pocket like Peyton Manning or Tom Brady.

Yes, it was posted.

I'm assuming that the OP is referring to pre-snap RPOs.

It's always a poignant moment when a Huddler dies. At least we know, which is a good thing. I'm afraid that some pass on and we just never know. RIP, Cosmo Girl!

I think we'll do it some based on what Brady did for Joe Burrow at LSU. https://www.pff.com/news/college-football-how-joe-burrow-and-the-lsu-offense-went-from-unknown-to-unstoppable But, I don't think we'll go crazy with it, as it's less likely to work in the NFL due to the quality and speed of the players. I'd much prefer that they just let Darnold's mobility happen by impressing upon him the need to make good decisions. They need to keep him in the pocket, let him analyze the play, and then make the appropriate read from there, as he has enough options (including his legs) to move the chains. https://www.sbnation.com/2018/2/28/17056432/sam-darnold-nfl-draft-usc-quarterback-offense But, yeah, a couple of RPOs per game might not hurt anything. It's just another wrinkle to vex the opposition, but let Sam master the nuances of being an adept pocket passer.

Lance looks very promising in practices. The only issue he's had is the handoff with the rbs, and correcting that just comes with chemistry and reps. I told you guys that Lance would be good, and he's well on his way according to Shanahan and local media.

I literally haven't heard anything on Moore since the beginning of camp until he got cut. Your comparison to Arnold is a bad troll job. You can do better.

I assure you, Chinn has been mentioned during the pressers.

18:05, guys.

We've all heard the good reviews on Dan Arnold during camp so far. And, by listening to yesterday's presser, I've concluded that he is a very cerebral player who is keen to master and use the nuances of the position to exploit the opposition. Vincent at the Riot Report adds to the optimism on Arnold by giving us some apropos comparisons to our last great TE, Greg Olsen. The correlations are interesting, if not compelling. I would suggest reading the article, but here are a couple of tidbits to wet your appetite: "Through his first four seasons in Chicago, Olsen averaged just over five targets-per-game, and while that is not nothing, during his three-year prime in Carolina that increased to nearly eight targets a game. For Arnold, there is the potential for even greater change, as last season in Arizona he averaged under 3 targets a game...if he is able to maintain the same efficiency while increasing his targets to five per game then his numbers should jump significantly." "Where Arnold has an advantage over Olsen at this point is in how he has been used to this point. During his time in Chicago, Olsen averaged around ten yards-per-reception each season, a number which jumped to around twelve during his first season in Carolina and then stayed there. Arnold, by contrast, averaged a little over fourteen yards-per-reception last season in Arizona, and already uses his vertical speed as a major part of his game." Vincent has other comparisons, including the curve for blocking. Arnold's desire is to be an every-down TE, and he realizes in order to do this, that he's going to have to improve his blocking, much like Olsen did while he was in Charlotte. So, again, there are similarities. Read the complete article, as it's nice food for thought. https://theriotreport.com/dan-arnold-looking-to-become-the-panthers-next-great-te/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=dan-arnold-looking-to-become-the-panthers-next-great-te

Nice pic! Could've been zoomed in a little more, but nice!