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!

     

Sam Mills III and game management


Sam Mills Fan

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

When the owner made his decision post-2018, he had a record of 8 years to observe from his head coach and 13 years from his GM.

He chose to keep them.

If his "mind was boggled" after Sunday, then he is nowhere near as smart as everybody thinks he is.

I have no doubt Tepper is smart. I'm not yet convinced he's "football smart". The vast majority of NFL owners are "business smart", but just because you can build a billion dollar empire doesn't mean you can run a football team.

I'm also a tad worried he may have fallen into the trap of liking his people. Rivera is an eminently likeable person (Hurney too) but having an owner who liked people that weren't very good at their jobs was what kept this franchise mediocre and inconsistent for twenty years under Jerry Richardson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, rayzor said:

This was a title given to a guy that is only kept around because of his dad. 

It's a role that the panthers have needed since year 1 of the Rivera era. I have no doubt that this was a job created only at Tepper's insistence, but putting Mills in the job only shows the disregard Rivera has for it.

Rivera sees no problem unless his boss points it out to him and will only do something to change if his job was on the line.

If I was tepper, I'd be calling Rivera back to the office and saying, "maybe I should have been more clear. Find someone who has experience and knows how to manage a game rather than someone who was here already and you just like and want to give a shot at a grown up job." 

I actually like what I've seen of Mills as a position coach (or an assistant position coach, at least). I'm okay with him.

I like Chase Blackburn too, but I wouldn't put him in charge of coaching quarterbacks. 

The idea is to assign jobs to guys who are qualified to do them. Time management is a head coach thing, and Mills has never been a head coach at even a high school level.

A former or retired NFL head coach (Mike Smith is available) could have been a good choice, or perhaps a former college head coach. Heck, even a small college head coach would have experience with time management.

But yeah, if you just throw it at an assistant, it's pretty clear you don't think it's that important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I would say that he's pulling things out of his ass to get people to visit his site.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...