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!

     

“winning franchises win” says matt rhule (5-10 record)


Recommended Posts

tanking a season you were going to lose anyway doesn’t guarantee future success, that’s true. but trying to win doesn’t always work out so well for teams either though, does it? take for example this year’s carolina panthers. not gonna get to coach against ron rivera and dwayne haskins every week my friend. or an injured matt stafford and a soon to be fired head coach. and when you’re going up against well coached teams and you’re outgunned at the most important position in the sport, it takes more than just “trying to win.” but i would think rhule (5-10) has to understand that by this point.

a lot of teams in the position to tank in the first place were there because they’re not talented, they’re poorly coached, and they’re poorly managed. of course it’s gonna take more than one high draft pick to overcome that. but i think carolina was in a unique situation this year compared to franchises like the jets and jaguars. coaching seems fine, the roster seems like a solid foundation to build on going forward, and there’s a gaping hole at qb (the most important position and the most difficult position to fill outside of the draft).

maybe we get lucky. people point to quarterbacks like mahomes, watson and jackson as recent examples of good-to-elite quarterbacks who fell lower than they should have (and lower than the carolina panthers will likely pick in 2021). but is there a comparable prospect in this class? is there an elite black quarterback in this class who will fall because idiot GMs don’t think they Look The Part or would rather have them convert to wr or some bullshit? or would we have been better off eating one late loss in a lost season and having our pick of the remaining quarterbacks at #3? does 5-10 feel better than 4-11? they both feel like poo to me. is the point to win super bowls or to be marginally better than the alternative?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Panthera onca said:

There are myriad other threads this rant could have gone in. Why did you feel the need to start a new thread?

this is an examination of rhule’s “winning franchises win” philosophy and how that relates to a losing franchise like the carolina panthers. winning franchises win. losing franchises lose. what have the carolina panthers done this year? the rhetoric doesn’t match the product. so what use is it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Smithers said:

Ahhh look, another thread about why our favorite team should have lost on purpose

Our team mantra is Keep Pounding damnit.  Sam Mills would roll over in his grave if this team intentionally gave the fug up for the sake of a draft position 

the ghost of sam mills would have probably been pretty happy for his son in that case i bet. don’t really care to argue about it though because he’s dead as a doornail and has absolutely nothing to do with this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

I'm still shocked Cooter, Philly, and their TB loons didn't have Teddy's back this season saying people didn't like him due to his skin color. I guess only good players get their dedicated SJW skills, lol.

They don’t stick up for black QB’s “without a personality.”

 

Thats a direct quote from a poster in their corner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Varking said:

And we aren’t a winning franchise.

right. like the question shouldn’t be “what do winning franchises do?” because it has nothing to do with the panthers, a clear losing franchise. the question should be “what do losing franchises do to become winning franchises” and the answer would appear to me to be “acquire good players and coaches” and in that case there’s absolutely no downside to having a larger pool of players to pick from in the draft at every single pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what was Carolina to do when the other team is throwing the ball to you ? Tell the guys to drop it? Tell your team if the other team fumbles dont try to pick it up? Washington was a bad team over all yesterday and the QB play was really bad, sometimes you are just the better team that day. Are you really shocked RR got out coahed? It didnt look like his guys where ready to go out and win the NFC East...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...