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!

     

The closest thing to a must-win game in years?


top dawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

OK, some of you may not agree, and perhaps I'm being hyperbolic in a literal sense, because it's just a game (season opener, no less), but there's no way that we can lose to the Jets and good things happen. We have to beat the Jets, period! New staff, and new QB, with a decidedly less talented offense. This is a must-win! Now I really think that there's no way we should lose, especially considering that the new boy wonder of New York City is not quite living up to great expectations in camp--i.e., he's looking like a lost rookie that is presently in no way prepared for the speed of the game; lose to him and that unstable organization, and our atmosphere here will become just as volatile as the Jets' may become very shortly. Our opening game won't be the Hot Seat Bowl because one staff is new and one is relatively new, but it will be the Hot Potato Bowl, and that hot potato represents  volatility. You catch it, and the atmosphere surrounding your franchise will become potentially explosive, even if it's just a slow burn that leads to a big boom at some given point in the future.

The Panthers really don't have any reason to lose. Sam Darnold, Rhule or anyone can say anything they want, but the crystal clear irony of the game, and something akin to the poetic justice of victory makes the Panthers' game against the Jets a must-win game in my eyes.

What do you see?

Edited by top dawg
  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see two teams that both are going to surprise people next year, both added a ton of new pieces, each with something to prove, going at it like its the Superbowl.   

We are NOT playing the 2020 jets.    

The jets beat two winning teams last year.

We beat zero.

I will not judge the season by the outcome of this game.

That said...I hope we destroy them.

Edited by SBBlue
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SBBlue said:

I see two teams that both are going to surprise people next year, both added a ton of new pieces, each with something to prove, going at like its the Superbowl.   

We are NOT playing the 2020 jets.    

The jets beat two winning teams last year.

We beat zero.

Who was the Jets' QB for those victories? That's rhetorical!

  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CPsinceDay1 said:

For Darnold it is...

For the team overall...not really.

 

 

If we can't beat a team with a brand new staff, rookie QB, a suspect O-line and suspect offensive skill players, then who the hell can we beat (with all these shiny new toys)?

And I'll add that Rhule and company pushed their chips in on Darnold.

Edited by top dawg
  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally prefer the toughest game be week 1.  Just because it is such a weird week.  

And there is no film on anything about the Jets.  

Week 1 IMO is often a crap shoot.  Good teams can come out slow and bad teams hot. 

Weird opening game for Sam too.  The revenge and hometown games are always a mixed bag.  Can work for or against a guy. 

  • Beer 1
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

    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...