BrianS

I'm sure you could be more wrong, but I'm not sure how. This Panthers team is one who is being clearly and consistently out-coached. There is no other way to look at it. Coaches win games in the second half, in the fourth quarter. When adjustments need to be made, when hard calls have to happen. Our team has been completely out-classed in the second half of every game. Every game! And it's not really all that close! We play well with our opponents until they see our gameplan, then their coaches do coaching things and give their players the edge to take the game away. Matt Rhule has assembled "his roster" There are only 12 guys left from the Rivera rosters. If the players aren't getting it done, it's Rhule's fault. If the coaches aren't getting it done, it's Rhule's fault. He is to blame, end of story. The only question should be what is the trajectory. Are we getting better toward the end of the year or worse? I would argue we have poor results, we have negative trajectory. That should lead to a regime change. It's really very simple.

It's just another sign of a dysfunctional organization. The concept of trading CMC isn't terrible, except that it is. Every team in the NFL can look back and see that the dude has played 10 games in the last 32. That's a HUGE hit to any trade value he might have. No one is going to give us anything remotely resembling value for him. If the Panthers think the guy can be healthy, there is literally ZERO reason to trade him. The only reason they would consider it is because they DON'T have that belief. Every other team can figure that out. It's just dumb, dysfunctional Panthers again if the report is true.

You're wrong. When you look at the different combinations, the common denominator for success is the QB. If you have a bad QB, it doesn't matter at all how good your line is. Hello New Orleans Saints. If you have a good QB and a bad line, it comes down to coaching and scheme. Hello Cincinnati Bengals. For clarity, I'm not implying either of those scenarios fit the Panthers. I'm also not implying that a good OLine is irrelevant. But when you talk about truly changing the trajectory of a team, only a good QB can do that with any regularity. This is why it just baffles the mind why we seem to be completely opposed to the idea of taking a swing at one. Yes, 100%, we're going to miss. QB's even in the first round are 50/50 chances. But you aren't winning the lottery unless you buy a ticket, and we seem completely unwilling to do so.

People who try to write off our defense as "living on the first three games" really need to take a harder look. Here, let me help. This is a defensive stat sorted by average starting field position. Basically, we put our defense in a worse situation than any other team. Whether that is because of poor offense, poor special teams or poor coaching decisions, our defense gets put in the worst starting position of any defense. However, when you look at yards surrendered per drive and plays surrendered per drive, our defense is the best in the league - still. And when you look at points surrendered per drive, we're in the top half: Bottom line is that our defense has signs of life. They actually seem to play pretty well until the entire team folds in the 2nd half. It's not three games that did this. But when you're saddled with an offense as bad as ours, with coaches who can't adjust in a league as competitive as the NFL you just can't expect miracles.

The problem with keeping Rhule now is actually rather simple to express: It's very clear that if he happens to be the coach next year, he's on a one year contract. Given that, what experienced NFL coach worth a cracked nickle is going to sign up for that? Given that, what free agents with any sort of ambition will come here? Keeping Matt Rhule at this point is handicapping yourself. We're bad enough that we don't need extra weight to carry climbing out.

It's like the entire staff has no idea what they are doing or saying . . . oh wait . . .

I get it man, I really do. It makes me nervous too. However, evaluate Pickett yourself. I want to hate him, but he's actually a pretty decent prospect.

Losing ground inside also makes it harder for your tackles to do their job. How many times have you seen opposing tackles this year just ride Burns upfield past the QB because we weren't getting enough push inside? OFTEN. OLine is very much a team deal. You need to be reasonably stout in the middle and reasonably athletic at tackle. I could even argue that being stout in the middle is even more important. Shortest route to the QB and all that.

While I understand why people see Pickett as a flash in the pan, and it may be a valid argument, you also have to consider that the same thing could be said of Joe Burrow or Mac Jones. Evaluate each QB "as is". I haven't watched much of Pickett, and just because of the Rhule links I want to hate him . . . but I can't. He has good anticipation, he can progess across the whole field, he keeps his eyes downfield under pressure, has good functional (though not exceptional) arm strength. He's a decent prospect. I'd feel better if we drafted him after getting rid of Rhule.

Absolutely incorrect. Joe Burrow was sacked 51 times this year, yet managed to complete 70% of his passes (34 TD / 14 INT) and help the BENGALS win the division at 10-6 (minimum) and likely 11-6 given they have the Browns this weekend who are without their starting QB. Tennessee QB's have been sacked 46 times this year. They are 11-5, likely to be 12-5, winning their division for the second year in a row. I agree that in general having a good OLine is quite important. But a good QB can cover up a lot of sins. A good OC can do the same with his gameplan and calls. Unfortunately, we have none of the three, and thus a huge problem.

We aren't trading back. There are too many factors working against us. First is the draft itself. This isn't a "trade up" draft. There just aren't a huge number of prospects worthy of trading up for. Honestly, who? The QB class is nothing like last year, and once you get past QB, are you really going to trade up for anyone more than a spot or three? Second is Fitts himself. He's on record as valuing picks in the top 15 far more than later. Basically he believes that the true impact players are picked in those first 15ish spots. If you want him to trade out of there, you're going to have to give him MORE than just straight value. I'm sure there are scenarios where we'd trade back, the problem is that they aren't realistic. Good teams are picking further back, but they didn't get good by making bad draft day decisions. Bad teams are picking where we are already.

Disclaimer: I don't know if BC is "the answer" at LT. That blame falls squarely on Rhule. However, I still see people saying "We can move him to LG". No. BC isn't a mauler. He's just not. If there is a hole in his game, it's power. The last thing you want at G is a guy whose main concern is his strength at the point of attack. This is why it was so important that we figure out what he is this year. There just aren't options with this guy. Rhule wants everyone to be "flexible", and he projects that onto guys where it doesn't make sense. BC is one of those. The guy is a tackle. Maybe he's a backup tackle. Maybe a swing tackle. But the guy is a tackle, arm length be damned. Unfortunately, here we are with one game to go and we've only really seen 2.5 games of him. Promising games, but not consistently convincing. Would he be more convincing if Rhule hadn't spent the last six months trying to round peg / square hole him? Maybe, I dunno.

This is what I was saying in another thread. There are only five or so coaches in the history of the league who turned it around after two bad seasons at the start of their tenure. The ANALYTICS say that if you can't show good progress by year two, it's unlikely in the extreme that you will be the answer for that team. I don't know how it isn't obvious to upper Panthers brass.

How many coaches ever get off the hot seat? Honest question. I can't think of any coaches who were considered to be on the hot seat but turned it around to have a long career at that team. Can you?

Tomlin is "ok". I see this as more of an organizational accomplishment. Good drafting and wise spending in free agency has done just as much as coaching to attain this level of consistency. And let's not forget that they had a franchise QB for his entire tenure. Yes, Big Ben should have retired a couple seasons ago. It doesn't change the fact that they just haven't had to look for one in the last 20 years.

This is what too many Huddle GM's just don't understand. Sure, ideally we'd trade down and recoup some picks. But this year? The draft just isn't going to have the compelling reasons for other teams to trade up. We also know how Fitt thinks. He believes - rightly or wrongly - that the first 15 players are really where the impact players are. He's not going to want to come out of that top 15 unless he gets more than value for the pick. And who is there in this draft that is worth moving up for? Detroit and Houston could both legit take a QB there, if they fell in love with one. Not the year for it, but QB is the one position that you probably reach for. Maybe even the Giants could take a QB if they no longer believe in Jones. I just don't see it. We're going to have to pick at six. If some QB shows out before the draft in some way, he'll be gone before six. Other than that, is there a guy worth going up for? I don't know who.

That's leadership and coaching right there. Ryan Kalil always had our protections right, no one has really taken up that mantle since.

While I don't disagree, TMJ and Shi have both spent fair time injured. I even like that Zylstra has shown the ability to help us if called upon. With BC especially, I can't figure it out. With Deonte, I know he was "injured", but it seemed like a roster injury as opposed to an actual injury. Rhule just hasn't treated these rookies well.

I'm not a Deonte Brown fan. I'm a fan of finding out in the midst of a year we were supposed to be rebuilding whether or not the guys we drafted are going to be able to help us. Both BC and Deonte fall in this category for me. They both needed far more playing time.

It only makes sense. There are still three teams who could finish at 13-4, potentially going down to tiebreakers as the first seed. Likewise, seeding is still up for grabs among four teams that could finish 12-5 potentially as seeds 2-5. NFC Playoff picture is fairly clear as to who the participants are, but seeding is still very much a question. Good. That's what we want. I don't want to win a meaningless game.

Let's get this out of the way first. It's not a narrative that Shaq has been underperforming the contract he was given. It's a fact. He was paid like Bobby Wagner. He's been "solid", yes, but not spectacular. Shaq has nearly played up to his contract this year, and a better team might have led him to be even more effective. Glad to see it. Now, what has never been in doubt (that I've heard) is his mental fortitude. He's right. If you don't get pissed off at losing, we don't need you. That sounds an awful lot like Cam. Good. We need that attitude.

Isn't this the sort of passing chart that made us think Teddy was the problem? Why doesn't this apply to Sam who has completed far fewer throws and committed far more turnovers?

Joe Burrow has been sacked 51 times this year. His team however is 10-6, and won their division. Burrow has thrown 34 TD's against 14 INT's and over 4000 yards passing while completing 70% of his throws.

In other news, Steve Smith too short to be an NFL receiver in the Rhule playbook.

Heaven forbid we have two serviceable tackles, that doesn't fit the Rhule narrative.