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!

     

Tyler Larsen vs Matt Paradis


raleigh-panther

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, thefuzz said:

Go back and look at all of Hurney's hits in the 1st round.  

If Burns is an OLB, Hurney will have drafted 4 linebackers in the 1st round, and two RB's.  6 of 11 first round selections have been two of the easiest positions to project to the NFL from college.

The harder positions like OT, QB, CB, DE, WR, DT he has been pretty good on, but only drafted 5 of each those in his time here, and the jury is still out on the WR that was chosen.

That's a pretty valid point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Go back and look at all of Hurney's hits in the 1st round.  

If Burns is an OLB, Hurney will have drafted 4 linebackers in the 1st round, and two RB's.  6 of 11 first round selections have been two of the easiest positions to project to the NFL from college.

The harder positions like OT, QB, CB, DE, WR, DT he has been pretty good on, but only drafted 5 of each those in his time here, and the jury is still out on the WR that was chosen.

You do have to give it to him with the Cam and Luke picks. Those weren't exactly guarantees. Sure Luke was going to be a starter no matter what, but he has turned out to be one of the best of all time and Cam revolutionized the QB position and outlasted his dual-threat counterparts like Kap and RG3. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, My Goodness My Guinness said:

You do have to give it to him with the Cam and Luke picks. Those weren't exactly guarantees. Sure Luke was going to be a starter no matter what, but he has turned out to be one of the best of all time and Cam revolutionized the QB position and outlasted his dual-threat counterparts like Kap and RG3. 

Didn't take anything away from him for those picks, just pointing out he prefers to go with an easier position to project vs. the harder ones most of the time.

It's why he seems to have so many "hits" in the 1st.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Mother of...

I never in a million years thought we'd stick him at left tackle. The fact that a group of professional coaches went into the season thinking that was the best option just baffles me.

Is there another FO/coaching staff that has f’d up the LT(and others)position like the Panthers have? It’s mind boggling just how long we have taken to put together a competitive o-line

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mc52beast said:

Is there another FO/coaching staff that has f’d up the LT(and others)position like the Panthers have? It’s mind boggling just how long we have taken to put together a competitive o-line

We had a very competitive O-Line in 2015.

I don't think we're historically bad at left tackle. We had Gross for a long time. Heck, it wasn't that long ago we had Michael Oher. Nobody seems to remember him but he was here.

I'd say the reason we've gone so long just treading water is because we had two head coaches who were basically the same guy. Both defensive coaches who put their priorities on the other side of the ball and felt the offense needed only to do just enough.

Until we hire somebody with a different mindset, this is what you're gonna get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Flip that around though.

I've said before that it's relatively easy to take a look at a player and see how good they are right now. Unfortunately, that's not all there is to it.

You also have to try and predict how well they'll go from being a college student to a paid professional making millions. You have to wonder about the influences that affect them. And even if those things are positive, how long can they stay good? Plus what about injuries? Can anyone really predict how much wear and tear a particular body can take?

Being a professional coach / GM is an incredibly difficult job. You're tasked with doing some things that are darn near impossible to do.

But that's the job.

And as it is with pretty much any other job, there are people who are good at it and there are people who are not.

The ones who are not don't get to keep their jobs using the excuse that it's difficult.

It's harsh, unkind and unfair oh, but that's how it is. You make millions if you succeed, and sometimes even if you don't. That's a big reason why you take on something that's impossible.

I see what you're saying, but I think you're drastically oversimplifying my argument and turning it into me saying "being a GM is hard so they deserve a break".  That doesn't convey what I'm trying to say at all.  What I'm saying is that every GM does the exact same thing... they take calculated risks.  You can't say the calculated risks we took last offseason weren't good ones.

They all hit some, they all miss some.  Hurney's hit rate is about as good as anyone else's.  Belichick has PLENTY of misses in his career.  Just so happens the system they have brings out the best in their players.  The system we have brings out the worst.  That can't all be put on the GM.  If the system sucks, it sucks, period.  No amount of talent at a good price is going to fix that problem.  Hurney isn't drawing up the playbook or making the playcalls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, My Goodness My Guinness said:

You are right. This may have been the most applauded off-season in recent memory. I even gave Hurney his due. 

But look at us now. This team has holes everywhere (literally in run defense). I really want to blame Hurney for this but the talent seems to be there. I think the coaching staff is the primary cause for the lack of performance. 

This is the exact thing I'm arguing.  Hurney brought in some damn good players on some really good contracts.  The talent has been squandered by poor coaching and poor scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DeAngelo Beason said:

I see what you're saying, but I think you're drastically oversimplifying my argument and turning it into me saying "being a GM is hard so they deserve a break".  That doesn't convey what I'm trying to say at all.  What I'm saying is that every GM does the exact same thing... they take calculated risks.  You can't say the calculated risks we took last offseason weren't good ones.

They all hit some, they all miss some.  Hurney's hit rate is about as good as anyone else's.  Belichick has PLENTY of misses in his career.  Just so happens the system they have brings out the best in their players.  The system we have brings out the worst.  That can't all be put on the GM.  If the system sucks, it sucks, period.  No amount of talent at a good price is going to fix that problem.  Hurney isn't drawing up the playbook or making the playcalls.

I don't determine the hit rate by looking at the individual players.

I determine the hit rate by whether our total roster is good enough to win games.

Yes, coaching matters, but the coach and the GM work together. That's why I believe you have to evaluate them together.

This combo isn't good enough. The last combo with Hurney wasn't good enough either. The combo of Gettleman and Rivera was better but still didn't ultimately bring home a championship and is no longer a viable option.

Time to burn it all down and start over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I don't determine the hit rate by looking at the individual players.

I determine the hit rate by whether our total roster is good enough to win games.

Yes, coaching matters, but the coach and the GM work together. That's why I believe you have to evaluate them together.

This combo isn't good enough. The last combo with Hurney wasn't good enough either. The combo of Gettleman and Rivera was better but still didn't ultimately bring home a championship and is no longer a viable option.

Time to burn it all down and start over.

We can agree on that last sentence.  I don't think it'd be smart to bring in a new coach without a new GM, regardless of how well or poorly either of them has performed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DeAngelo Beason said:

I see what you're saying, but I think you're drastically oversimplifying my argument and turning it into me saying "being a GM is hard so they deserve a break".  That doesn't convey what I'm trying to say at all.  What I'm saying is that every GM does the exact same thing... they take calculated risks.  You can't say the calculated risks we took last offseason weren't good ones.

They all hit some, they all miss some.  Hurney's hit rate is about as good as anyone else's.  Belichick has PLENTY of misses in his career.  Just so happens the system they have brings out the best in their players.  The system we have brings out the worst.  That can't all be put on the GM.  If the system sucks, it sucks, period.  No amount of talent at a good price is going to fix that problem.  Hurney isn't drawing up the playbook or making the playcalls.

If you believe that coaching is what has really hampered Marty's success, why did he hire said coach, keep said coach, and continue to keep said coach?

These two are married, joined at the hip, a pair....or whatever you want to call them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, thefuzz said:

If you believe that coaching is what has really hampered Marty's success, why did he hire said coach, keep said coach, and continue to keep said coach?

These two are married, joined at the hip, a pair....or whatever you want to call them.  

And let's not forget, fell on the sword to save his job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I need to redo my sub then.  Didn't realize that
    • Here is how I see it. I haven't read through all the comments so it has probably been said. We had ONE way, just one single way to win that game against the Bills. With us having a QB who decided he wanted to switch teams real quick, the only chance (and yes, still a small chance) to win that game was run the ball, with one of top, most violent RB's in the league, down the throat of one of the worst defenses in the league. You start the first play and you keep doing it until the final whistle. Doing this keeps the ball out of the hands of our QB who forgot what he was supposed to be doing that day. It keeps the ball out of the hands of a solid offense you would have to stop. You run the ball with the guy who gets more yards, which in turn should net you more points (I think Dave forgot that getting more yards is better than less yards though, so I hope someone let him know this after the game). Running the ball also can eat up the clock if successful. So the only way we win is a slow, methodical low scoring game where we own the time of possession. What does Dave do? The exact opposite of all that. Dave honest the god, took the best gameplan you  could use, a gameplan any 10 year old that only watches every other game would know to use, that every single fan knows you had to use, Dave's gameplan was to do the exact opposite of that. Dave thought it is better to use a RB that would net you way less yards than the other. Someone will have to explain why it is better to 1/3 the yards you could get (explain why a 4 yard gain is better than a 12 yard gain.) I honestly dont know why less yards is better. It seems like some are saying guys are happier and have more fun the following Monday if they lose but someone is happier because they got to run more? That confuses me. Dave decided instead to put the ball in the hands of a QB who would forget which way they are going down the field, and that's the game has a timer, which ends when the timer goes to zero. Not only does Dave decide to play the players that do worse in practice and games, he will avoid the plays that would seem to have the most chance of success, he decides to keep to the plays that don't work. In orher words, if history shows the play would yield success, you dont use that play. If you have been using a play that does not work at all, that means you should not use any other play except the ones that dont work. Dave will have to explain that strategy also because I don't understand it.  And finally, those who actually watch the whole game can see it, Dave Canales shows an immense amount of fear. He was scared to death of the Bills. You can't get that from the box score. You also can't understand just how much his fear contributes to the loss. Thats why people who say it was all Dalton just don't have the mental capacity to judge, or did not watch at all (only looked at numbers). For example, I think it was the second drive (maybe forth). Dave stopped a touchdown, it was all him. Rico does what Rico does (made Dave look dumb by showing more yards are better than less) and busts out something like a 40 yard run. Things are rolling. Instead of keeping the drive rolling Dave said "hold up, less points are better than more points...i have to stop this." So he pulls out a play so dumb that it leaves the place in shock. He puts Dalton out wide where everyone knows he is worthless, making the decision that we are onlying using 10 players this play, and we don't feel like have a QB at the moment....the perfect time for wildcat (because we are cats too). Its executed exactly as Dave hoped for, flawlessly...a loss of yards. Booyah. Things looking good. Now it's time to put it in Dalton's hands to seal the deal. It goes off perfectly. Buffalo gets the ball. Dave proves he is a genius. I guess I was wrong about him...
×
×
  • Create New...