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!

     

The first time the dog bites, it is the dog's fault...


MHS831

Recommended Posts

You take the points.  We were at home and our defense was playing lights out.  Plus we showed no ability to convert on 3rd and short in 58 minutes.  

Our defense played almost 8 full quarters at the time without giving up a TD.  Odds were good we could stop the Bills again.  the game changes completely when you have to score a TD to win vs a FG to tie.  A stupid PI penalty almost guanetees them a chance to tie.  Take the 3 and have faith in your defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

You can cry whatever you want, but you are wrong.  Zay Jones dropped a pass  that should have beat us.  Just like they did years ago.  Smart coaches put the odds in their team's favor if they can---and he reduced our odds of winning by 5%.  That is not BS--that is how the Patriots beat teams--they put the opposition at a disadvantage.  This is more chess than it is chest pounding.

Here's the problem with those "odds."  They are based on us going for it and converting, scoring a TD.  If we don't convert, then how much do our odds go down at that point?  Probably double digits.  We had trouble converting all day in short to go situations.  Not sure why you're so confident it would be any different in this situation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Statistical analysis is irreplaceable as self-critique on your worst "gut" tendencies - i.e., whatever bullsh*t conventional wisdom has unaccountably crystalized in the back of your mind. But using it to score individual plays is a fool's errand.

Rivera made the right call. He understood the balance of units and judged accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's statistics and then there is history. We drafted a kicker... because our kicker is PROVEN to be unreliable. I don't buy all this "taking 3 points," as if we haven't had issues closing out games with our kicker.  There's a risk involved whatever you do.

I just kind of like my chances of 4th and goal with 2 of the top 3 leading rushing touchdown players in CAROLINA PANTHERS HISTORY.

And even if you don't get it, Buffalo gets the ball on their own 2 yard and has to drive it 98 yards to win against a Panthers defense that has been killing them. It was the wrong call.

 

 

 

 

leadingrusher.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheWiz said:

There's statistics and then there is history. We drafted a kicker... because our kicker is PROVEN to be unreliable. I don't buy all this "taking 3 points," as if we haven't had issues closing out games with our kicker.  There's a risk involved whatever you do.

I just kind of like my chances of 4th and goal with 2 of the top 3 leading rushing touchdown players in CAROLINA PANTHERS HISTORY.

And even if you don't get it, Buffalo gets the ball on their own 2 yard and has to drive it 98 yards against a Panthers defense that has been killing them. It was the wrong call.

 

 

 

 

leadingrusher.png

Our kicker was proven to be unreliable... on kicks like the one in question? 

You do realize that distance has some effect on kicking reliability, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

You can cry whatever you want, but you are wrong.  Zay Jones dropped a pass  that should have beat us.  Just like they did years ago.  Smart coaches put the odds in their team's favor if they can---and he reduced our odds of winning by 5%.  That is not BS--that is how the Patriots beat teams--they put the opposition at a disadvantage.  This is more chess than it is chest pounding.

But he won the game , he knew where his best odds where and that was the defense because it proved itself on the field for 4 qtrs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Smithers said:

Here's the problem with those "odds."  They are based on us going for it and converting, scoring a TD.  If we don't convert, then how much do our odds go down at that point?  Probably double digits.  We had trouble converting all day in short to go situations.  Not sure why you're so confident it would be any different in this situation.  

It's actually only a 5% less chance of winning.

Pinning the Bills at the two helps that a lot if the TD fails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

I  have not seen Rivera's  decisions on the goal line questioned yet.  However, it was a few  years ago--against Buffalo--when RR kicked a FG up by 3 on fourth and 1.  We lost when Buffalo scored a TD.  Rivera admitted it was stupid, and he converted to what we would later call  Riverboat Ron.

Sunday was no  different. On 4th and 2 or so, we should have gone for it for the exact same reason we should have a few years ago against buffalo.  And we nearly lost the same way--a TD pass at the end of the game. 

I stumbled across this ESPN article  that explains my point-

"The Panthers' field goal on 4th and goal from the 2, up 3 points in the 4th quarter, stands out as the biggest 4th down error of the week, losing 5% win probability based on the decision. Being up 6 with about 3 minutes to play merely invites the Bills to go for the TD and the win, rather than a FG to tie. And failing to convert wouldn't be so bad, leaving the Bills likely inside their own 2. Ultimately, it didn't cost the Panthers, as the Bills failed to score on their final drive. "

Riverboat Ron?  Hardly.  Any gambler knows the odds and plays them.   He should have known what to do having been there before against the very same team.

 

So let me get this straight. We should have gone for it on 4th and 2 up by three so if we failed they could have tied it with a field goal instead of a TD. How stupid. How many short yard failures did we have at the goal line yesterday? How many times did they get inside our 20?  Truth is if we went for it and didn't make it they would have likely scored a field goal and sent it to overtime. No Rivera made the right move and anyone with half a brain would agree given the way things were going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rayzor said:

paddleboat ron.

that's what we've got until a fire is lit under his keister.

lmao yea...

He's surprisingly soft for a defensive player. I'd rather have Wilks as a HC at this point....he seems to actually have balls between his legs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, panthers55 said:

So let me get this straight. We should have gone for it on 4th and 2 up by three so if we failed they could have tied it with a field goal instead of a TD. How stupid. How many short yard failures did we have at the goal line yesterday? How many times did they get inside our 20?  Truth is if we went for it and didn't make it they would have likely scored a field goal and sent it to overtime. No Rivera made the right move and anyone with half a brain would agree given the way things were going.

You can't make two catastrophic failures on the 1 and hope to score. Not blocking #90 was just hilariously stupid by our OL and could have been the TD right then and there. Then we miss a wide open TD pass....I mean that part was player execution for all the times Shula derps it up he can't block and throw a good pass there....that was def on the players that possession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
    • Won’t stop until people stop buying overpriced poo.
×
×
  • Create New...