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!

     

Jets had an earlier offer on the table


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

There is virtually zero connection to the past other than the stadium. Unless you are superstitious I don't see how it's relevant. 

 

Exactly!!! Also the uniforms but I'm hoping that will come up soon too. I would love to get rid of the Silver. Especially the helmets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New coach + new GM + new QB = cautious optimism. 
 

I also only started the clock on Tepper when he hired Rhule. Two years prior was just a learning curve and inherited a mess of an organization from top to bottom.

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

What in our franchise history has some of this fanbase based their cockiness on? I mean, what am I missing? Where does this confidence come from?

Looking at our history from an outsider's point of view, it looks to me like we stumbled back assward into a handful of good years while largely sucking.

Panthers are in the top half of the league in playoff appearances in the last 20 years, and only 4 teams have more Superbowl appearances.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

Panthers are in the top half of the league in playoff appearances in the last 20 years, and only 4 teams have more Superbowl appearances.

We're tied for 17th in playoff appearances since 2000, so middle of the pack. We're 18th in wins and have a sub-.500 winning percentage since 2000. Yes, we went to two Super Bowls. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LinvilleGorge said:

We're tied for 17th in playoff appearances since 2000, so middle of the pack. We're 18th in wins and have a sub-.500 winning percentage since 2000. Yes, we went to two Super Bowls. 

It's actually tied for 12th in playoff appearances 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

We're tied for 17th in playoff appearances since 2000, so middle of the pack. We're 18th in wins and have a sub-.500 winning percentage since 2000. Yes, we went to two Super Bowls. 

Also wins don't matter as much as playoff appearances in determining whether your team is successful.

I have given you a solid reason why fans should be proud of their team and you still try to downplay it.  I think you just like to be in misery.

Edited by jfra78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jfra78 said:

Also wins don't matter as much as playoff appearances in determining whether your team is successful.

I have you a solid reason why fans should be proud of their team and you still try to downplay it.  I think you just like to be in misery.

I'm just being realistic. This organization has never achieved sustain success. We've sporadically had some good seasons and then got overall very poor return out of the career of an MVP QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Ties go to the bottom, not the top.

No you are wrong ties go to the top.  You can't be tied for 2nd and be no first.  If this was the case, no one could ever be tied for first

Edited by jfra78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Rico walking is no big deal. I'll take a healthy 2024 Hubbard over Rico any time and losing Mays is, again, no a big deal.  Young is signed for what, $35M for the next two years? Say he wants $50M but the FO doesn't. If they put the franchise tag on him, that would be around $55? So basically they are getting Young for the next 3 years for an average of $30M per year. Putting the franchise tag on him wouldn't be my first choice but it gives them an option that wouldn't be locking him into a long term, $50M contract. I'm not suggestion they do that. Just that the option will be there should they get to that point. Hunt is on a 5 year deal which is done in 28 so he either restructures or is gone anyway. Moton will be 35 by then and will either be gone or have diminished playing time. Neither of those players has anything to do with getting Young a contract. The O line is way overpaid anyway. Hopefully by the time they are gone, Freeling and Hecht will be developed and Ickey will be healthy. Young was benched his second year and only got his job back because Dalton was injured. Not sure how you can call that entitled. And I would NOT say putting a rookie QB on a team with no receivers, tight ends or O lineman and then being put with a coach who never wanted you and is fired mid season, is a definition of luck. As far as competition, no team is going to bring in competition for a QB picked first overall - especially given the capital that was given up to get him.  
    • With apologies to Lady Cowboy fan, any day we can screw over the Cowboys is a GOOD day…
    • Been here since 2014ish. Good times. Its a shame Zod wont sell, it wouldnt take that much effort to get this place back into shape.
×
×
  • Create New...