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!

     

Anderson wasn't good enough for Carolina


Jmac

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Toomers said:

The only one changing anything is you. Using “it must have been” is not fact. That’s what you think. 

  At that point, CJ was like a backup QB. For the position with the most injuries. Even if he didn’t play, he wAs valuable. If CMC goes down, what was the plan after? And why did we spend money to do it? 

  What is what if about having a backup RB? Was it to give CAP 2 more carries. Or “needing to get a RB” now to spell CMC. That was the coach. 

 Bu, no matter what, the organization is always right. 

The organization isn't always right but they aren't always wrong and the coaches and staff aren't incompetent as you suggest either. The answer is in between which critics here want to characterize taking extreme positions to further their agenda 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2019 at 7:26 PM, KillerKat said:

CJ misses 1 reception, gets sent to Rivera's dog house and not played again then eventually cut.

Funchess drops 5 passes in a game and continues to get playing time.

Rivera is a fuging clown.

o0p0s1.jpg

Love that pic because its true lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

The organization isn't always right but they aren't always wrong and the coaches and staff aren't incompetent as you suggest either. The answer is in between which critics here want to characterize taking extreme positions to further their agenda 

So what’s my agenda then. If I praise/bash both GMs, Rivera, everyone? What agenda do Ihave? Yours is obvious. Homerism. Anything ever said against the team also isn’t always wrong either. Doesn’t keep you from chastising anyone with an opinion not towing the company line. Some people defended Shula. Imagine that. What agenda did they have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Toomers said:

So what’s my agenda then. If I praise/bash both GMs, Rivera, everyone? What agenda do Ihave? Yours is obvious. Homerism. Anything ever said against the team also isn’t always wrong either. Doesn’t keep you from chastising anyone with an opinion not towing the company line. Some people defended Shula. Imagine that. What agenda did they have?

Really? You bash Rivera, Hurney, Norv etc and you don't have an agenda?  My agenda? Fair evaluation good and bad. I rarely respond except when I see exaggerated posts like yours and other critics who fill every thread with biased extreme positions. If you were balanced in your posts I would have little reason to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Really? You bash Rivera, Hurney, Norv etc and you don't have an agenda?  My agenda? Fair evaluation good and bad. I rarely respond except when I see exaggerated posts like yours and other critics who fill every thread with biased extreme positions. If you were balanced in your posts I would have little reason to respond.

And I’ve also praised and defended all of them. So what’s the problem. If someone doesn’t think exactly as you do it is incorrect. What was I out of balance on in any of this. That’s the “PC” you didn’t tell me I was wrong in the right way to make me feel better BS. 

  One of us has an agenda that affects every thought we make. Then there’s me who just judges the acts of the situation. Not the irrelevant issues used to take away from the real question. Just like all these posts to avoid the fact that the whole ordeal was a mistake. 

  When I say something false about anyone, feel free. But this sudden “you will not post negative comments” schtick by people is laughable. Dispute it or stay out of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's laughable is polluting this forum with Hurney-Rivera-suck posts.

We all know how some of you feel. Why the fug do you feel the need to repeat it in so many ways? It's annoying and unproductive. Then you throw a hissy fit, telling everyone how stupid and illogical they are when they call you on it. You go over the mountain and through the woods to say the same thing over and over and over again, then try and deny it with convoluted reasoning and useless questions.

That's what's laughable.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, top dawg said:

What's laughable is polluting this forum with Hurney-Rivera-suck posts.

We all know how some of you feel. Why the fug do you feel the need to repeat it in so many ways? It's annoying and unproductive. Then you throw a hissy fit, telling everyone how stupid and illogical they are when they call you on it. You go over the mountain and through the woods to say the same thing over and over and over again, then try and deny it with convoluted reasoning and useless questions.

That's what's laughable.

 

 

It was much better when it was Gettleman and we got constant updates on why we should have drafted Hunter Henry. How many times did we have to hear that? Or a Philly rant? Or which crappy WR we should sign? That about cover it? We all get sick of different things. Maybe it’s your turn. Ignore it or prove it wrong. Sad to say, its going to continue. 

  Make sure you remember you have been on the opposite side of this for years. Just now, it’s not you doing the complaining. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Toomers said:

It was much better when it was Gettleman and we got constant updates on why we should have drafted Hunter Henry. How many times did we have to hear that? Or a Philly rant? Or which crappy WR we should sign? That about cover it? We all get sick of different things. Maybe it’s your turn. Ignore it or prove it wrong. Sad to say, its going to continue. 

  Make sure you remember you have been on the opposite side of this for years. Just now, it’s not you doing the complaining. 

I don't complain, just think outside the box in order to try and come up with what may be solutions.  And I'd like for you to pull up ALL of these posts about Hunter Henry or anyone (maybe five tops, certainly no more than 10). You're a liar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Toomers said:

It was much better when it was Gettleman and we got constant updates on why we should have drafted Hunter Henry. How many times did we have to hear that? Or a Philly rant? Or which crappy WR we should sign? That about cover it? We all get sick of different things. Maybe it’s your turn. Ignore it or prove it wrong. Sad to say, its going to continue. 

  Make sure you remember you have been on the opposite side of this for years. Just now, it’s not you doing the complaining. 

BS.. Ppl would complain but after a time would fall in or atleast see what happens before playing the doom and gloom role...

For some reason ppl were way more objective with all of Gman moves..

He say Byron Bell was left handed so he should be able to play LT.. Ppl would complain for a week but than gave Dave the benefit of the doubt.. Until it blew up in our faces.. And still every offseason Dave would get a clean slate and most here would trust in Dave...

It wasn't until poo became a ongoing pattern and he was fired that ppl actually Express their true feelings and had a different retrospective of his time here..

But when Dave was our guy he was our guy and most here backed him and had hope every year.. Even when he completely fuged up...

FACTS..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

  

8 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I don't complain, just think outside the box in order to try and come up with what may be solutions.  And I'd like for you to pull up ALL of these posts about Hunter Henry or anyone (maybe five tops, certainly no more than 10). You're a liar.

They were plenty enough to get sick of. So enjoy your time dealing with it. Everyone has to when you hit that high horse and tell us how much better you are. Or one of your opinions. Denarius Moore? That’s him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Toomers said:

 

  

They were plenty enough to get sick of. So enjoy your time dealing with it. Everyone has to when you hit that high horse and tell us how much better you are. Or one of your opinions. Denarius Moore? That’s him. 

I have never told ANYONE on this board that I was better than them at providing opinions, or that my opinions were better than theirs. Are you seriously that delusional and/or insecure? 

Moreover, I know it may be hard for you, but try and make the distinction between discussing the positives and negatives about something or someone and simply complaining about something or someone repeatedly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, top dawg said:

I have never told ANYONE on this board that I was better than them at providing opinions, or that my opinions were better than theirs. Are you seriously that delusional and/or insecure? 

Moreover, I know it may be hard for you, but try and make the distinction between discussing the positives and negatives about something or someone and simply complaining about something or someone repeatedly. 

And simply complaining about something is all your doing. Telling people what to post. Can’t defend against its truth so whine that they bring it up.

   But this wasn’t a problem when people did it to Gettleman for years. When we were going to a Super Bowl. But NOW it’s an issue. Why is that? What changed? When did it become wrong to criticize the GM? I missed that meeting? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, are you dumb? Me starting a thread or two about possibly bringing in Denarius Moore (and as a package deal with Jared Veldheer) is not the same as incessant bitching in one form, fashion or another. Someone bringing up a possible player does not irk people like constant bitching about what is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I mean, are you dumb? Me starting a thread or two about possibly bringing in Denarius Moore (and as a package deal with Jared Veldheer) is not the same as incessant bitching in one form, fashion or another. Someone bringing up a possible player does not irk people like constant bitching about what is.

 I forgot. You did it. So that makes it cool. That’s my bad. 

   Like I said....Dispute it or stay out of it. But you will continue to deal with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...