Panther defense most conservative in the league.

[panthers55]

1 hour ago, Moo Daeng said:

Too early to know for sure but a safe assumption would be that it's a result of the inexperience of the roster. In a related note Roy Williams talked this week about not double teaming because they don't have the experience to do so and haven't executed it well in practice.

This write up would suggest that he would love to blitz if the coverages can be sound. 

https://theriotreport.com/phil-snow-three-safety-look-panthers-defense-breakdown/

So the conventional wisdom is that zone defenses are only effective in the NFL if you either have great players or you bring pressure to keep them from getting exploited. Any NFL quarterback will pick apart a zone if given enough time. So the idea that you don't bring pressure if your secondary is suspect flies in the face of what works in the NFL. And the results when we sit back in prevent defense just underscores the fundamental flaw in that thinking.

[ladypanther]

So....the Panthers are always playing a prevent defense at the end of games which the opposing teams seem to always be able to score on.

My question is this: why are those teams not playing the same defense so we can score on them too?

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, ladypanther said:

So....the Panthers are always playing a prevent defense at the end of games which the opposing teams seem to always be able to score on.

My question is this: why are those teams not playing the same defense so we can score on them too?

Our offense is a little easier to stop simply because there is not an appreciable deep threat. Some of that is Brady and getting too cute with him schemes and some is that Teddy is overly risk averse. 

Either way, we are just simply not an offense that is built to score in those clutch situations. 

[Snake]

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

So if you lose because you limit the bleeding, that is a good thing? That is what you seem to be saying. We stop no one on 3rd down and keep our own offense off the field  And it isn't that Snow can't scheme or adjust more than situationally he has done a poor job disguising what he is doing and is very predictable and easily exploited. It is one thing to lack talent, it is quite another to have a poor scheme that is very simplistic and predictable that is easily exploited by just about everyone we played outside of Detroit when we changed our scheme. 

The biggest problem with our offense is that the defense never gets off the field. We are 31st in stopping opponents on 3rd down. When you give up 10-15 play drives all day your offense is not getting enough opportunities. 

What I'm saying is we don't have the personal to win very many matchups on the field. If you become more aggressive and take more players out of coverage that problem just gets worse not better. It takes a talented team to blitz effectively and we are not talented at very many positions because Hurney has screwed up once again. Hell we are not even talented at the kicker level because of that. He literally retained the worst guy after cutting a draft pick and the guy we paid millions too. That's how terrible he is. 

[ladypanther]

12 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Either way, we are just simply not an offense that is built to score in those clutch situations. 

That is certainly a sad statement.

 

By the way...there was a bit of sarcasm in my post....and frustration!

[crowntownpanther]

On 12/3/2020 at 4:04 PM, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, there is a reason that "bend but don't break" poo doesn't get used in the NFL......

For us it’s “bend but don’t break” til they hit the 50 after running only 40 seconds off the clock, then it’s just “bend over and take it” til the end zone.

[crowntownpanther]

On 12/3/2020 at 4:49 PM, t96 said:

It's worked pretty damn well this year actually considering the talent we have on D (lackthereof)... Once we get some more talent in the secondary, we'll see how Snow can adjust his scheme to more man to man and more blitzes. If he doesn't then it'll become an issue but right now our corners can't cover even scrub receivers 1 on 1 and even when we blitz we don't get there and someone would be open anyways. Our scheme has been completely fine this year when taking into account the personnel. If we still do this zone D and lack of blitzing crap with talent back there, I'll be concerned, but let's take a wait and see approach.

My concern is where/when we get talent in the secondary. I don’t see us getting much help in the draft this year until maybe round 3. Probably 4 if we do decide not to run with TB for one more year.  This forum would explode, but this is why i think potentially passing on qb could be better for the org in the long run.  TB won’t win us a Super Bowl, but can we get the other pieces in line first?  Counter argument is you wait, miss the shot at a relatively high draft pick, and we improve to a middling 8-8 team for years...

this is why none of us get paid to make these decisions. 

[OldhamA]

8 hours ago, crowntownpanther said:

My concern is where/when we get talent in the secondary. I don’t see us getting much help in the draft this year until maybe round 3. Probably 4 if we do decide not to run with TB for one more year.  This forum would explode, but this is why i think potentially passing on qb could be better for the org in the long run.  TB won’t win us a Super Bowl, but can we get the other pieces in line first?  Counter argument is you wait, miss the shot at a relatively high draft pick, and we improve to a middling 8-8 team for years...

this is why none of us get paid to make these decisions. 

I'd much rather we rebuilt the team before worrying about snagging a 'Franchise' QB. 

To me it just reeks of desperation (and arrogance actually) "oh we won't be picking this high again we HAVE to take a QB". 

If Rhule and the coaching staff thinks that Lawrence / Fields / Wilson/ Lance / Trask et al is their guy and they fall to their pick, fine. What I don't want is the team chasing after one of those guys when there are better players on the board that can help us in the long term.