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!

     

Three.


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Jeremy Igo said:

Three.

# of Turnovers

# of Curtis Samuel snaps

 

Neither are acceptable.

considering how little we ran the ball....the fact Samuel got 3 snaps is mind boggling. 

But not surprising in the Rivera era.  Mind boggling stuff like that happens all the time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sam Mills Fan said:

I still haven't heard why Moore was returning punts over him. Isn't Samuel behind Byrd on the returner depth chart?

Don't let the fumbles fool you.  We don't need to be complaining about Moore doing punts or playing.   Dude needs to be on the field as much as possible.   He is a true game changer. 

But yeah, Samuel needs way more snaps and opportunities.  They don't need to come out of Moore's snaps.  They need to come out of all the other guys' snaps. 

Easy prediction.  Smith will get WAY too many snaps vs the Eagles.   His 2 plays this week were 100% playcall.  100%.  Any WR on the field for us would have been open for those plays.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

And teams don't win after three bad turnovers.

I got curious and looked it up on PFR this am.  Since 2011 there have been 340 games where a team had a -3 turnover differential or worse. 16 wins. 

So 95%+ of the time a team in our situation has lost since 2011.  It happens. It would have been awesome to pull out the best Panthers 4th qtr comeback ever. Thought we were going to do it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yep. I was hoping for and calling for a day three guy. But I didn’t research the position to say if we should or should‘t have jumped at a particular guy at a particular spot.    And everything I read said it was a poor draft for RBs depth wise. I guess when Seattle takes a backup RB in the 1st, that kind of backs that up.    I definitely think we should keep 4 running backs and if King can play well enough then keep him too.    I believe I heard Canales say we are a running team (talking about drafting a WR he will be needing to block as well as catch). Well if we are gonna be a running team by identity we don’t need to stock the WR room to overflowing. If one room has to sacrifice, it should not be the RB room given our circumstances. 
    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
    • I just saw the funniest thing...or very disappointing, depending how you handle misery. A guy on YouTube did a 2027 'way too early' mock draft.  If I told you the simulator has the Panthers selecting in the top 10 , what would you say?  If I told you it was pick #8 and only two QBs were taken in the top 7, what would you say?  If I told you this dude had us taking a defensive player, what would you say?
×
×
  • Create New...