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!

     

I cannot freaking believe we still won't have back-to-back winning seasons


Sam Mills Fan

Recommended Posts

Of all the teams I'm a fan of, this is probably the most maddening stat I've ever seen.

1995: 7-9

1996: 12-4

1997: 7-9

1998: 4-12

1999: 8-8

2000: 7-9

2001: 1-15

2002: 7-9

2003: 11-5

2004: 7-9

2005: 11-5

2006: 8-8

2007: 7-9

2008: 12-4

2009: 7-9

2010: 2-14

2011: 6-10

2012: 7-9

2013: 12-4

2014: 7-8-1

2015: 15-1

2016: 4-12, 5-11, 6-10, 7-9, 8-8, 9-7 (and there's no chance we're winning our last 5 games with no Kuechly, Kalil, etc.)

 

This is down-in-the-muck levels of depressing. Even if we have a winning season next year, we're gonna have to keep hearing these "never had back-to-back winning seasons though!" things until 2018 AT BEST. That would be the end of Season 24. I'm sorry, but this is just inexcusable. How is this possible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Jordan is about to show Jerry Richardson how to do it in 7yrs of owning the Hornets, while the original Hornets had many back to backs before leaving.

This is what you get with JR, and when it seems like he's not trying.....he's not trying. Refusing to make obvious moves and spend what it takes. Not trying. Happy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we somehow beat Seattle we probably finish at 9-7. Playoffs likely out of the question but it's not crazy to think we win out if we beat Seattle. If we lose Sunday night then yes it's guaranteed we won't have back to back winning seasons until 2018 at the earliest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, truthjuice said:

Believe it friend. The owner is fine with mediocracy. 

Anybody who knows the owner would tell you that's ridiculous.

Wanting to win has never been the issue with Jerry Richardson.

Knowing how to accomplish it is where the problem lies.

But Richardson deserves credit in that he finally came to realize the way he was running things wasn't working, so he left it up to Ernie Accorsi to pick who the new GM should be. He's since also stood back and let Gettleman make decisions nobody expected him to be on board with (like cutting Steve Smith).

Winning consistently in the NFL is not as simple as wanting to or spending enough money. Plenty of teams have done both and still come up short. Heck, we had nearly everything go right last year and still couldn't seal the deal.

It's just that difficult.

And given this, it's a mistake to assume lack of success equals lack of desire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Anybody who knows the owner would tell you that's ridiculous.

Wanting to win has never been the issue with Jerry Richardson.

Knowing how to accomplish it is where the problem lies.

But Richardson deserves credit in that he finally came to realize the way he was running things wasn't working, so he left it up to Ernie Accorsi to pick who the new GM should be. He's since also stood back and let Gettleman make decisions nobody expected him to be on board with (like cutting Steve Smith).

Winning consistently in the NFL is not as simple as wanting to or spending enough money. Plenty of teams have done both and still come up short. Heck, we had nearly everything go right last year and still couldn't seal the deal.

It's just that difficult.

And given this, it's a mistake to assume lack of success equals lack of desire.

It's a witch hunt and an Internet witch hunt at that. It's the easiest kind to perform . You just hit buttons and don't have to do anything or risk anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • First off, my memory is faulty and so I should remember you. Anyways, welcome back. Having been around here since 2004/2005, I do have to say all these hot takes are not necessary new. I still very much remember all the constant complaints about Jake Delhomme. How he was too inaccurate, fumbled the ball too often, threw bad interceptions, and how Steve Smith deserved a better QB. How this franchise needed to replace Jake for someone better because he dragged everyone down. We even had names for Jake defenders; Blind Delhomme Jock Sniffers (BDJS). That one thread about Chris Weinke over Jake Delhomme because Weinke threw for 423 Yards but only scoring 13 points remains the worst hot takes I've ever seen around here. So to me, it feels like history repeating itself again and I don't feel like getting that much involved in flame wars like I used to. I am more of a sit back and see what the players/team does type of person. And even then, yes, there are so many moving parts that it's not as easy to pinpoint the core issues, especially when you're not inside the building and know every single detail.  And yes, I think even way back then, I hated how overvalued the QB position was and it hasn't gotten much better. It's to where my philosophy has shifted to where if you can't win a SB with a QB on their rookie contract, you might as well get another one. Otherwise, you have to give that QB so much money that the rest of the roster suffers and your window becomes quite narrow.  That's why I'm skeptical that Mahomes/Burrow/Jackson/Allen will win more than one or two SB's between them. None of them look as invisible as they did a few years ago and that's because their targets are much inferior and/or they are getting more roughed up behind a worse O-line.
    • Haha I was still off was thinking of mac jones he has done extremely well this year with basically no weopons as all the 49ers are hurt except for mcaffrey but he is playing slow this year for some reason. 
×
×
  • Create New...