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!

     

OL looked bad last night


SBBlue
 Share

Recommended Posts

Darnold has better pocket awareness and bigger brass balls than Teddy Two Yards did so he's actually made our offense better than what it really is.  He steps up in the pocket, avoids sacks with some decent moves, and isn't scared to run the ball if he has to.

Our O-line is atrocious, there are no other words for it.  The two fumbles Sam had was because our line can't hold for three seconds - Sam has to know this and protect the ball from here on out.

I am also tired of Rhule and Brady trying to lift the O-lines spirits by trusting them to get one damn yard on 3rd and 4th and 1s....they can't do it.  Again, we need to implement zone blocking schemes, misdirection and designed runs to get outside....we won't be getting more than one or two yards a carry up the middle or off-tackle. 

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jayboogieman said:

Moton didn't look like a legit starter for a lot of the game either. That game was just an all around bad performance by the Oline.

He struggled, but obviously im not just talking about this game specifically. He isn't the one that needs to be replaced. We can count everybody else struggling more in the future than moton. 

Edited by CPF4LIFE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OL is definitely trash. It's extraordinarily obvious. 

We need just accept that is going to be the case for the bulk of the season. Maybe the younger players start to show some sign of being able to help us as the season progresses. That's about all we can hope for.

On the positive side, we have been able to win three straight games with a dumpster fire OL. Says a lot about the scheme and the play of the rest of the offense.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, outlaw4 said:

Not sure if the "last night" in the title thread is necessary.

I will say we were giving our backs an actual chance later in the game but unsure how much of that was attrition or better execution.

 

IMHO "last night" is necessary. The first two games were against excellent DL's. 

Seeing a substantial increase in pressure against a weaker opponent is NOT good.  

The first two weeks were serviceable.

Darnold should have seen less pressure last night, not more.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BlackPanther21_ said:

As long as we get some guys that are better at the game of football than the bush leaguers we have now (Elflein, Daley, Paradis), I will be happy. 

Miller is crap, Daley is a stop gap. Paradis is bad.

Move Elflein to C, give Brown first team reps this week at RG and fug it, see what Jordan or Christensen can do at LG.

  • Pie 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

    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
    • I just saw the funniest thing...or very disappointing, depending how you handle misery. A guy on YouTube did a 2027 'way too early' mock draft.  If I told you the simulator has the Panthers selecting in the top 10 , what would you say?  If I told you it was pick #8 and only two QBs were taken in the top 7, what would you say?  If I told you this dude had us taking a defensive player, what would you say?
    • It is due diligence at that point. Irresponsible not to take him.  Crossing my fingers on this one, he has everything you look for except experience.  
×
×
  • Create New...