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!

     

Is Gano done?


the butch

Recommended Posts

Anybody can hit a 40-yarder.  He's missing kicks that are extremely important, and is why he gets paid.  He's just not good enough.  As for where to turn, I can't say.  But I hope that he is no longer on this team at the end of the year.  He's the very opposite of consistent at the distance we need him to be consistent at; again, you can find anybody at the YMCA that can kick 45 yards.  Gano is a choke artist of the highest caliber.  You don't win games with players like him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't a chip shot but it does raise the question of what exactly he offers. With the alterations to kickoff, he offers no additional value there. Okay, but he still has a strong leg so he'll make long kicks? Nope. Can't do that either.

Anybody can go out there and make <40 yard kicks.

He doesn't do anything poorly, but hes a specialist and should thus be special in some regard. We humored 2 kickers on the roster because John Kasay was automatic. We got rid of Kasay to bring in Graham to win the field position game. Now we have none of those things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Toolbox said:

Well considering that his specialty was kicking it out of the end zone.. we don't need it anymore.. I just want a kicker that can actually kick a 50+ fg on a consistent basis.. not perfect but respectable.. gano doesn't fit that bill.

This is what i want as well. I just want a kicker that can hit a 50yd field goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gano has always been inaccurate outside of 50+ yards.

Nothing new. Never understood why fans thought players like Gano, Ginn, and Ealy have improved because of the 2015 season.

The Panthers added 3 game changers to the defense in 2015 with Norman, Tillman, and Coleman. Those 3 extra game changers on defense are missed. Coleman should have never been moved to SS allowing Boston to start.

The coaches seem to think settling for 50 yard FGs is acceptable. That is what their play calling shows us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brought it up after Denver.  When Kasay walked out onto the field, I was surprised if he missed.  When Gano walks out on the field, I'm pleasantly surprised if he makes it.

When Rivera sent him out there for the 54 yarder, i knew it was a mistake and thought we should've sent Lee out to pin them back on the goalline.

Gano seems like an awesome guy, and I did lobby for him after Kasay, but I've seen enough to know he can't be depended on.  Then again, he isn't Olindo Mare lol.  The question is, is there anything out there better right now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Proudiddy said:

Brought it up after Denver.  When Kasay walked out onto the field, I was surprised if he missed.  When Gano walks out on the field, I'm pleasantly surprised if he makes it.

When Rivera sent him out there for the 54 yarder, i knew it was a mistake and thought we should've sent Lee out to pin them back on the goalline.

Gano seems like an awesome guy, and I did lobby for him after Kasay, but I've seen enough to know he can't be depended on.  Then again, he isn't Olindo Mare lol.  The question is, is there anything out there better right now?

Maybe there isn't anything better, but damn the coaches need to put the team in position to succeed.  That's 4-down territory.  Of course, Ron wants to show faith in his players.  He even stated, "Graham is going to make a bunch of kicks for us."  Welp.  Your move, coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Toolbox said:

Well considering that his specialty was kicking it out of the end zone.. we don't need it anymore.. I just want a kicker that can actually kick a 50+ fg on a consistent basis.. not perfect but respectable.. gano doesn't fit that bill.

They may end up changing the kickoff rule back to what it was since it's had the opposite effect of what was intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...