Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

From 2011-2012 the panthers were 2-12 in games decided by 7 points or less. Since 2013 we are 12-4

Ricky Spanish

By Ricky Spanish,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Ricky Spanish Grand Master

Ricky Spanish

Posted
Posted

For the longest time, when the chips were down it was a foregone conclusion that the panthers would find a way to lose every close game they played. For the past couple years though, that impending doom feeling has been replaced by hope and optimism.

I'll admit the old habits crept in after that second pick Cam threw. But this isn't your father's panthers. This team can win the close ones. This team doesn't pack it in at the first sign of adversity. It seems like the Riverboat has built a hard nosed football team that finds ways to win. 

The Cardiac Cats are back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

A lot of that is the growth and maturity of our players and coaches, so I dont want to take anything away from that.

But also, a lot of it is just regression to the mean. We were SO unlucky for two years.  Every important bounce went against us.  At some point those bounces had to go our way and even out.

Seattle is kind of going the opposite direction.  They got so many breaks last two years.  Now everyone is wondering what is wrong.  Nothing is wrong with Seattle.  They are a really good team that has lost 4 close games that in the past, they won, sometimes in lucky fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Omega Atrocity Newbie

Omega Atrocity

Posted
Posted

A lot of that is the growth and maturity of our players and coaches, so I dont want to take anything away from that.

But also, a lot of it is just regression to the mean. We were SO unlucky for two years.  Every important bounce went against us.  At some point those bounces had to go our way and even out.

Seattle is kind of going the opposite direction.  They got so many breaks last two years.  Now everyone is wondering what is wrong.  Nothing is wrong with Seattle.  They are a really good team that has lost 4 close games that in the past, they won, sometimes in lucky fashion.

The Seahawks really have been the luckiest team in the league the past few years. Everyone remembers the last play in the super bowl, but that was only set up because of the luckiest play I think I've ever seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...