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!

     

Report: Shula And The Panthers Planned On Getting McCaffrey And Samuel Months In Advance


Saca312

Recommended Posts

If there's any more reason to hope that Shula turns his career around, this could just be it.

Apparently, McCaffrey and Samuel were part of the plans for months. Shula, Rivera, and coaches have been studying their film extensively months prior to the draft, figuring out creative ways they could be used. This was not a combo just bunched up overnight, as is revealed.

http://pantherswire.usatoday.com/2017/05/15/monday-morning-blues-let-cam-newton-be-cam-newton/

Quote

Offensive coordinator Mike Shula finally defines “evolution”

Ever since coach Ron Rivera mentioned in a press conference that the Carolina offense needed to “evolve,” Panthers fans has been waiting with bated breath.

What does it mean?

With free agency coming and going without a single hint, Panthers fans were left guessing.

Fast forward to the 2017 NFL draft, where general manager Dave Gettleman engineered the selections of not one, but two offensive weapons that can moonlight at running back and wide receiver in Christian McCaffrey and Curtis Samuel.

Not long after, Albert Breer’s interview with Mike Shula finally shed light and defined the “evolution,” once and for all.

"Over the past couple months, Shula and his coaches ramped up their study of college offenses, including the ones Samuel and McCaffrey played (and others like Texas Tech and Virginia Tech) to find ways to build on a scheme that already carries perhaps the NFL’s most complex run game. Part of it was in evaluating players like McCaffrey and Samuel. But another was figuring out how they’d use them."

It is fascinating that the Panthers braintrust put in months into the decision to draft McCaffrey and Samuel. While some (myself included) thought the pick was the result of having McCaffrey’s running backs coach at Stanford now on staff in Carolina, it was actually more methodical than that. This is deep.

"It’s why the Panthers probably would’ve taken McCaffrey, even if Leonard Fournette had fallen to them, and it’s why they double-downed by taking another Swiss Army knife in the second round. It evolved like this: The more they looked for ways to use Newton, the more they saw how versatile weapons from spread schools would fit, and it became apparent how dangerous Carolina could be with all of it put together."

Carolina’s front office and coaches first understood that the foundation of the offense is Newton. Once they figure that piece out, they put in hours of film study to figure out what the best weapons were to surround their quarterback.

I have even more respect and appreciation for Gettleman, Rivera, Shula and the whole team that helped bring McCaffrey and Samuel to Carolina. This was an intelligent and intricate plan to put Newton in the best position succeed after pouring through hours and days of film study.

This means they finally realized that he is much more successful with receivers that can separate and win early, so they do not have to win late. They realized that he is better with deception and creating mismatches, instead of just getting the biggest and baddest skill players possible.

Very eye opening. One of the biggest gripes that put a downer on the potential of McCaffrey and Samuel was the fact that "Shula wouldn't know how to use them."

Well looks like they were already planning extensively for months on how exactly they would.

Do you have hope that these extra months of study and planning could produce fruitful results on the field? Discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Just to clarify: I'm not arguing that height or footwork can’t affect QB play. I'm asking how those concerns translate into measurable, consistent outcomes. That’s the standard we should be applying to all QBs, not just Bryce. If height is such a limitation, then we'd expect to see elevated batted passes or poor pressure evasion. Yet none of that shows up in the data. Bryce was one of the lowest in the league for batted passes and his 16.9 pressure-to-sack ratio is good enough for 9th out of all QBs with 300+ dropbacks. So if you believe footwork tied to height is a meaningful issue, what metric shows that because two that would aren't doing so? This isn't about denying flaws. It's about applying fair, consistent standards because otherwise we’re not evaluating performance which means that it's not analysis taking place... it's just going off of the vibes that somebody has consciously decided on. Citing one red zone play you remember doesn't provide that consistent standard. I don't say that to dismiss your memory, but to emphasize that anecdotal evidence (especially from an avowed skeptic) shouldn’t carry more weight than consistent tape or analytics. For example, there was recently dissonance over Bryce's deep ball accuracy where it was implied that he was inaccurate throwing 20+ yards. Yet, the data and film show otherwise. And I unfortunately have to still ask since you won't directly answer: What specific metrics do you believe matter when evaluating whether a QB is top-10? You've mentioned YPA and passing yards per game, and that's fair. If that's what you're prioritizing, then let's call that your criteria but clarity matters because it prevents moving goalposts when the data doesn’t match one's expectations. I appreciate the response and hope that your holiday weekend goes well also. ❤️
    • Me too. I got other things I can do. Tie it up 2-2 and I will be back, but Im tired of watching us get swept.
    • Svechnikov and I'm voting cause I'm pissed. 
×
×
  • Create New...