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!

     

Matt Rhule defends Joe Brady

Zod

By Zod,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
Zod Grand Master

Zod

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

From the Athletic

Quote

But coach Matt Rhule defended offensive coordinator Joe Brady’s calls, instead pointing to a couple of plays on the first red-zone possession in which poor execution proved costly: a Darnold overthrow to tight end Ian Thomas in the end zone and Darnold’s fumble on a botched handoff.

“I had no issue with the play calling. We had a seam route to Ian Thomas that we have to throw and catch, and that’s a touchdown. We had a fourth-and-1 that walks in if we don’t put the ball on the ground,” Rhule said Monday.

“We had a guy open again (on another possession). I thought Joe called a good game down there. I just think we have to execute better. I say that, that starts with me as the head coach (with) practice and all those different things.”

Thomas was open on the first-and-10 play (from the 13) that Rhule referenced, but it was a fairly tight window. Still, as CBS color analyst Tiki Barber noted during the broadcast, Darnold needed to fire the ball into the area of Thomas’ facemask. Instead, Darnold threw high and Thomas was only able to get one hand on the ball.

After two Christian McCaffrey carries, the Panthers had another run set up for McCaffrey on fourth-and-1 at the 2. But Rhule said Darnold came out too wide from under center, causing him to lose the ball when he bumped into fullback Giovanni Ricci. The Jets recovered.

“We just have to get that mesh better. We probably have to practice that play more. That was a game plan-specific play, a play we ran a lot last year,” Rhule said. “We just need Sam to be a little tighter to the midline.”

Barber agreed, telling CBS viewers: “Sam Darnold forgot you’ve gotta clear the fullback before you extend the ball out to the running back.”

A Shaq Thompson interception helped get the offense in scoring position on the next drive, which stalled at the 3 when Darnold threw the ball away on second-and-goal, then overshot an open Terrace Marshall Jr. on an out route just past the goal line on third-and-goal.

The QB draw was a great play call by Brady. The Panthers went to an empty backfield, spread McCaffrey out with the receivers and had Darnold go in untouched through a big gap in the Jets’ front.

Still, the 1-for-4 red-zone showing (touchdowns only) put the Panthers in a tie for 25th in that category — in the same area as 2020 when they finished 28th with a red-zone percentage of 50.9.

Having a healthy McCaffrey should help, but tight end Dan Arnold said one player does not make a successful red-zone offense.

“No matter what play we’re calling, you’ve just gotta do your job. And there wasn’t enough of that (Sunday) in the red zone,” Arnold said. “And that’s really kind of where it starts. Good football teams are going to be able to figure it out no matter what.”

Added Rhule: “We have to execute better and score more points on offense if we want to win this week versus the Saints.”

 

So perhaps some of us were too hard on Brady. The calls could have yielded points if the execution was there. 

  • Pie 15
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Varking Grand Master

Varking

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

I said this yesterday multiple times. The calls were fine, Darnold just missed some throws. He’ll make them as time goes on. We had the correct play called each trip into the red zone. That’s a plus. Darnold missed two throws and fumbled one exchange. If we correct those player mistakes then we bow that game wide open. 

  • Pie 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted

I dont think Brady did a bad job at all.  The plays were there upon a second watch.  And a couple of other observations from me watching the game last night: 1. Our line did pretty good in the first half but then the Jets made some changes and put more pressure on them in the second.   2. It appeared to me that Brady dialed everything way back in the 3rd qt because it felt like the game was completely in hand.  Right or wrong I think that was the game management style for the 2nd half on sunday

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
1of10Charnatives Mentor

1of10Charnatives

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
5 minutes ago, ZeroZeroSeven said:

I’m more concerned about the offense in the 2nd half…109 yards and 3 points after halftime.  That’s not going to cut it moving forward.

This is the key point here.

Rhule's defense of Brady based on lack of execution during red zone trips in the first half holds water, but what is disingenuous about it is that it distracts from addressing the bigger concern: Brady's poor showing after the other team has made halftime adjustments.

  • Pie 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mbarbour21 Proficient

mbarbour21

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

This is the key point here.

Rhule's defense of Brady based on lack of execution during red zone trips in the first half holds water, but what is disingenuous about it is that it distracts from addressing the bigger concern: Brady's poor showing after the other team has made halftime adjustments.

I fully agree with this. 100 yards after the half? I'm sorry, but he didn't seem to mix it up enough BEFORE the red zone. Granted, Rhule is right. If the final score was 33-14 we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. It could have easily been that too. But, that doesn't mean that we overlook other issues because we had red zone issues. It really looked like the "run, run, pass" days of old. I don't believe we had a big enough lead for that. We have to stop playing to not lose, versus playing to win. It will come back to bite us. 

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
1of10Charnatives Mentor

1of10Charnatives

Posted
Posted
Just now, mbarbour21 said:

I fully agree with this. 100 yards after the half? I'm sorry, but he didn't seem to mix it up enough BEFORE the red zone. Granted, Rhule is right. If the final score was 33-14 we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. It could have easily been that too. But, that doesn't mean that we overlook other issues because we had red zone issues. It really looked like the "run, run, pass" days of old. I don't believe we had a big enough lead for that. We have to stop playing to not lose, versus playing to win. It will come back to bite us. 

The playing not to lose mentality exhibited by many coaching staffs in the NFL who are supposedly way better at this sort of thing than the rest of us drives me to distraction. Stop shifting blame to your players and grow a set.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 3
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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Mistuh Jones
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By Mistuh Jones · Posted

      This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      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
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      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.
×
×
  • Create New...