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!

     

Panthers are 4-0 against top 5 defenses in the league.

Jeremy Igo

By Jeremy Igo,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

tarheels Newbie

tarheels

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Hogmolliesmaht said:

My advice to you is to stay on the general NFL forums. It will not end well for you here, if you can't come up with better arguments than the strength of schedule Bull poo.

The Panthers are 17-1. There is a reason why so few teams have done what they have done so far. It is extremely hard to win that many games in the NFL, regardless of who you play. Everybody who knows NFL football knows that.

its not that hard when you are playing a bunch of injured and sub par teams. You cant argue that the nfc south was tough competion. you cant argue that the nfc east was tough competion. Theyre records show they were weak teams that Carolina beat.

did you not read above where I showed you that the perceived superior Patriots lost to the Giants with lesser records?

its just sports talk,what couldnt possibly end well?

no one/I didnt say the Panthers suck. They did what they needed to do to get there.

but in the context of what remains I believe they will be the 2 and not the 1 when its over.

sports is nothing but opinions clashing till the game is over. Neither you nor I know exactly what happens on the field.

you seem to forget the plenty of times year after you thought so and so was the superior team and they still lost.

But now that its the Panthers theres no way they could fall into that category?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tarheels Newbie

tarheels

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Hogmolliesmaht said:

Nobody cares. The Panthers won a couple of games with a back up QB last year too, so what?

no, I meant the back-up was the reason they did poorly for a 3rd of the season which makes the perception that they were generally bad or weaker than what the Panthers might be ,wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hogmolliesmaht Newbie

Hogmolliesmaht

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, tarheels said:

its not that hard when you are playing a bunch of injured and sub par teams. You cant argue that the nfc south was tough competion. you cant argue that the nfc east was tough competion. Theyre records show they were weak teams that Carolina beat.

did you not read above where I showed you that the perceived superior Patriots lost to the Giants with lesser records?

its just sports talk,what couldnt possibly end well?

no one/I didnt say the Panthers suck. They did what they needed to do to get there.

but in the context of what remains I believe they will be the 2 and not the 1 when its over.

sports is nothing but opinions clashing till the game is over. Neither you nor I know exactly what happens on the field.

you seem to forget the plenty of times year after you thought so and so was the superior team and they still lost.

But now that its the Panthers theres no way they could fall into that category?

 

 

Conference games are almost always tough, regardless of record. If you don't understand that, then you need to leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tarheels Newbie

tarheels

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Hogmolliesmaht said:

OK, now you're just being willfully stupid. Everybody has do deal with bad calls from time to time, Denver has no special claim to victimhood.

no, now I'm being an older man who has watched sports for 35 years and knows blatant manipulation when I see it.

who said anything about Denver? I meant league wide.

lol at thinking it means I think Denver was negatively affected by bad calls(you really need to drop the perception that I'm some pro Denver fan). If anything, they got calls that helped them get here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Swaiy Newbie

Swaiy

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tarheels said:

no, now I'm being an older man who has watched sports for 35 years and knows blatant manipulation when I see it.

who said anything about Denver? I meant league wide.

lol at thinking it means I think Denver was negatively affected by bad calls(you really need to drop the perception that I'm some pro Denver fan). If anything, they got calls that helped them get here.

Whoa, let's not get carried away here lol. Just a couple.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hogmolliesmaht Newbie

Hogmolliesmaht

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, tarheels said:

no, now I'm being an older man who has watched sports for 35 years and knows blatant manipulation when I see it.

who said anything about Denver? I meant league wide.

lol at thinking it means I think Denver was negatively affected by bad calls(you really need to drop the perception that I'm some pro Denver fan). If anything, they got calls that helped them get here.

If you'e not pro Denver, then why is every single post about how the Panthers aren't good enough to win? If sure as hell can't be  the feeling you get just from watching the games because the Panthers are proving themselves every time they take the field. You have to be pretty dense to think the Panthers are sure fire underdogs if you have actually been watching the games with no bias, as you claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tarheels Newbie

tarheels

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hogmolliesmaht said:

If you'e not pro Denver, then why is every single post about how the Panthers aren't good enough to win? If sure as hell can't be  the feeling you get just from watching the games because the Panthers are proving themselves every time they take the field. You have to be pretty dense to think the Panthers are sure fire underdogs if you have actually been watching the games with no bias, as you claim.

the Patriots were favorites against the Giants who had poorer records, twice.

it has nothing to do with feelings.

gee werent the Patriots blatant favorites in the game last week?

I already said yesterday that I did in fact pick the Panthers to beat the Seahawks and the Cards.I did pick them to make the SB obviously

I'm not picking them to beat Denver.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRWatcher Mentor

GRWatcher

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, tarheels said:

no, now I'm being an older man who has watched sports for 35 years and knows blatant manipulation when I see it.

STOP with this bs. You are being arrogant again. Your age or how long you've watched anything has nothing to do with any point you're trying to make. We don't care. Bandwagon we're not. Again, people can be stupid for a long time.

 

20 minutes ago, tarheels said:

who said anything about Denver? I meant league wide.

Now this is asinine (there's an old word for ya). You respond to a post about Denver then assume everyone should be able to read your mind. Why would we want to??

Are you Donald Trump?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hogmolliesmaht Newbie

Hogmolliesmaht

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, tarheels said:

the Patriots were favorites against the Giants who had poorer records, twice.

it has nothing to do with feelings.

gee werent the Patriots blatant favorites in the game last week?

I already said yesterday that I did in fact pick the Panthers to beat the Seahawks and the Cards.I did pick them to make the SB obviously

I'm not picking them to beat Denver.

 

 

Good, people have been picking against us all season long. Your reasoning for doing so is idiotic though.

Strength of schedule is irrelevant.

Super Bowl experience is irrelevant, especially when the experience is getting smoked by an NFC team that the Panthers just beat twice.

Whether or not you think the AFC was tougher this year is irrelevant, not to mention  that it's only your opinion and not a fact

. The fact is that the Panthers are good on both sides of the ball and Denver is good on one side of the ball. I would take the Panthers defense  against anybody right now and none of your flawed reasoning is going to change my mind.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tarheels Newbie

tarheels

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, GRWatcher said:

STOP with this bs. You are being arrogant again. Your age or how long you've watched anything has nothing to do with any point you're trying to make. We don't care. Bandwagon we're not. Again, people can be stupid for a long time.

 

Now this is asinine (there's an old word for ya). You respond to a post about Denver then assume everyone should be able to read your mind. Why would we want to??

Are you Donald Trump?

of course my age has everything to do with it. I have wisdom and life experience and the ability to evaluate the history of what I've seen. It has nothing to with arrogance. You dont have to like or believe or understand anything I say for it to be right and/or true.

 

 

 

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

    • cardiackat88.
      Well, the Niners just doomed themselves to mediocrity

      By cardiackat88. · Posted

      Teams do some super stupid stuff with mid-fairly good QBs. I think they are just absolutely terrified they will be stuck with a QB that is not the quality of the QB they have now, even if its someone like Daniel Jones. Lots of trash QBs go in the first round. I encourage you to take a look at the sad, sad list of first round QBs in the last 15 years.  
    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
×
×
  • Create New...