panthers55

Football is a copy cat league. Coaches see what others do that works and take elements for their own use. Since we are fitting the offense to our personnel it will be our version of offense using concepts from various influences. That is what everyone does. Here is an article discussing McVay and Shanahan. Note McVay and Kyle Shanahan. built upon the concepts of Mike Shanahan from 20 years ago for example and put their bend on it. https://www.theringer.com/nfl-playoffs/2022/1/26/22902126/kyle-shanahan-sean-mcvay-five-years-evolution

Reading this thread I thought the exact same thing. From what I have read Reich let his OC make the playback without much input so he wasn't steering him too much to what Reich would run. Of course Reich said that he would be integrating things and tweaking the playback but Thomas brought a lot of Sean McVays offense with him. He said he wants to take advantage of our strengths so we will be running a lot to take pressure off Bryce. We will take advantage of our good offensive line. He said the goal is to be able to run or pass out of the same formation so the defense has to defend both on every play. He said his scheme is to win. One game we might throw 40 times the next run 40 times. Adapt and do what works.

If you find that you are always upset because people or things don't meet your expectations, then lower your expectations and you will be happier. That doesn't mean you can't hope that the Panthers are much improved just don't expect it and then when we are you will be much happier. And if you are pessimistic you are expecting bad things that is much different from lowering your expectations.

Since fan is short for fanatic it makes sense they will be emotional

Ben was wrong. When something good happens for a pessimist they think it won't last and you can't be happy because now something bad will be next. Where an optimist will take a good thing be happy and expect more good things will happen. If you have to be a pessimist so you don't get disappointed you clearly aren't resilient likely have low frustration tolerance and are emotionally immature. I am an optimist and find my life is good and I can root for the Panthers and deal with losses or wins with little problem. Part of being an optimist is looking for the positives even in bad situations and choosing your attitude in spite of circumstances. Whereas pessimists stay unhappy and manage to see the negative in every situation. No thanks....

It is May, the time of year when we get to discuss the draft and free agency and hope our new brain trust can guide us to a winning season which eluded us last year. When new coaches come in they usually have a depleted team that it takes years to build up. Instead we have lots of weapons and both a good defense as well as great special teams. Young will learn to play within himself and let his teammates do the work. I have no clue how successful we will be but with our previous coaches like Fox and Capers they went deep in the playoffs in year 2. Rivera took until his third year but with all of them there needs to be early success or it likely won't happen. So Reich doesn't have a long time to win given Rhule took 3 years of the five Tepper said it would take to build a consistent winner. This is year 4 and we have been patient.

For defensive linemen the shift is not that great. They may have different assignments or have more 2 gap responsibilities instead of a one gap penetrating style that they are more familiar with. But things are pretty similar. It it guys like Burns who are now considered outside linebackers that really have a lot to manage. Especially if we use some form of Fangio's 3-4.

Considering you are in your base 25% of the time and in nickel well over 50% it won't be much different than before since we use the nickel a lot. I think it will make the defense even nastier especially if we bring lots of pressure.

Brown is 220 and might be able to do the job.

Did he play during the year and practice every day. Then he contributed. Was he a senior and expected to start or did he sit behind Mac Jones as an underclassman? I guess being on such a good team you have to wait your turn is now a bad thing. Did Maye sit behind Howell last year.?

All I said was Young was a finished product and Maye wasn't experienced enough to consider and the UNC fans all came out of the woodwork. Maye might be the greatest guy ever but not yet. If you compare them, Young is much better and it isn't close. If Maye came out this year they would be putting him no higher than the fifth best quarterback. Who knows next year he could be 1 or 2. Wasn't that the question?

Your point?

And the best indicator of the future is the past. Of course , the NFL is littered with great college qbs who couldn't replicate their success in the NFL. That includes Cam who almost won a Superbowl. So the best way to find a great NFL quarterback is watch the successful college ones and see if their skill sets match up with the system you are running. People erroneously think that if they aren't as good in the NFL they are underachieving when often it is bad marriage between the system and QB or other factors like revolving coaches and coordinators.

But in this case Young did carry that team and brought out the best in everyone. Just because other folks with credentials fail doesn't mean credentials mean nothing or are useless. And iin Young's case it was an indication of his talent which overshadowed his height or build.

You know who else won a national championship, won the Heisman, played in the SEC and went number 1 in the draft? Yeah, Cam Newton and he is on Youngs side. Maye isn't even a consideration at this point.

It is the experience of playing at the highest level and winning the game. How many players get to do that in their college career. It is a big deal.

Young because he won a national championship, played in the toughest division and is a great skilled player. Maye can only claim the third thing - he is a great skilled player. Let's see how he plays next year...

Won't do that in the second round. Guard isn't a highly valued position and you can find good guys throughout the draft. Free agents aren't that expensive either compared to tackle.

Given his size and athleticism I think Washington could quickly develop into a force. I would consider him as early as the second round although I doubt we we value any tight end over edge rusher or CB.

With coaches tape in hand and having the ability to ask the candidate what was he thinking, what was the call, take me through your progressions, etc. What exactly can't you see or know? And again if the S2 were not overvalued than why did Stroud just take a nose dive based in the results. If we saw good results on the field and a poor test score why should we believe a test over what we see. If the test were used like the wonderlic as a very small factor it is one thing. But when the developers say no one who scores low is successful it seems more than just one factor and way over blown. As someone who administers tests like these I have real problems when tests are purported to do more than they do. They become more counterproductive than helpful when it could help you make the wrong decision because you thought the results are ironclad and highly.ptedictive and they werent. And the reason so many bust is because there are so many factors which influence success or can derail it. Should you gather as much info as possible ? Sure as long as you know how important each factor is. And you don't let one factor or test determine your decision.

Did you see what the total N on the analysis used to determine the cutoff of 80? 27 quarterbacks over 8 years and a few others that took it voluntarily like Brees. In testing terms if a test is new or old but was normed with thousands of subjects it is obviously more useful to make conclusions. And if you are trying to predict something you need data backward and forward to make comparisons. Let's be clear I am behind Young 100% if he is our choice. I didn't say anything the test because Stroud tested poorly. In fact I am looking forward to seeing how they do over the next several years. It is a great comparison because their scores were on the extremes. I think the concept behind the test is solid. I am sure processing speed and spatial visualization among others is necessary to be a qb at this level. I think the hype is overblown with the designer over stating their results based on very few comparisons. So in testing terms it has not been around long and the results since they take years to assess are enough to say things like nobody who has scored low have been successful. As if you score low you won't be successful and this test is a big factor which 100% can predict that according to the test designers.

Actually it just confirms what you see on the field. Which is what is interesting with Stroud. He demonstrated good processing on the field and not the test. And the S2 doesnt measure competitiveness or desire to be great. So what do you believe? What you see on the field in real time against opponents. Or a computer test you take for one hour purporting to measure the things on the field you just witnessed he could do. Seems results on the field far outweigh a test supposedly able to tell these things which is new and largely untested. They used a pool of 117 quarterbacks which they narrowed down to 27 starting qbs and did their analysis with those 27. And you wonder why I say the test is useless until you get more data since it takes years after a qb actually plays to be able to analyze the data. And 27 qb comparisons is a way too small sample to make definitive decisions. Again the test may prove great but until it is valid and reliable it causes more harm than good if people take it too seriously and think it does something it doesnt.

Again it should factor little to nothing. Certainly not as much as it is garnering until there is more data. If we use it to sway us to Young it better be right or it did more harm than good if Stroud ends up the better QB in a few years.

Not being hostile simply pointing out obvious flaws in placing much stock in this test at this point. The problem is not in using it as one factor among a number of things in evaluating a QB, but like in the case of Stroud it is saying based on this research he stands little chance to be successful given his low score despite film of games showing the opposite. As someone who administered cognitive and performance related tests for 30 years I know the limits of what they actually measure versus what they claim. And issues like attention span for example have significant impact for example on continuous performance tests.

So that means that there is a positive correlation between high processing speed and success in physical activities like quarterbacking. But given their data on quarterbacks upon which they decided that an 80 was a cutoff score was 117 quarterbacks over 8 years which they culled done to 27 starting quarterbacks and did their analysis. They are suggesting from that they can predict with 100% that a really low score means you won't be successful. No outliers so far because your N is so low which makes it very limited to use for prediction until much more data has been captured. And if the adage is not judging rookies until year 3 why are they using 2021 data? You wanted questions. I got em... https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathletic.com/4430449/2023/04/20/panthers-nfl-draft-bryce-young-s2-test/%3famp=1