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!

     

I'm sorry but this isn't a winning record team.


Snake
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Fug Drump said:

What is a pressing situation to a "good team"??  Yall feel that the Panthers are a good team, correct???  Or were they over-inflated with a 3-0 record due to playing against three bad teams???  If you are a good team, then those weren't pressing situations.

Any time you have a  fumble that was not called that would have given the Panthers great field position but let Dallas retain position and drive for a score was bad. Add on the obivious one side penalities called against the Panthers and the no calls against Dallas, putting the Panthers in situations that would be called pressing were hard for the Panthers ( or other good teams)  to overcome. To disallow that this had a negative effect on the games outcome would be foolish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Make the playoffs? Don't know. A lot of factors that we don't control go into that.

Winning record though? Yeah that's very possible.

It's also very possible that we end up sub. 500. Yes we can look past this loss and we play less competition but that's not given. Dallas wasn't a fluke game more a game that exposed our weaknesses. Something the coaching staff couldn't overcome. I think beating up on lesser competition made us look like a legitimate team. I think we are a rebuilding team. Time will tell who's the "dumb" one in this. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Honestly, he should've hoped that we win, but suspected that we lose. That was a tough order with Horn and CMC out (and still not overwhelmingly promising with them in).

It was a winnable game until we got out coached. Plenty of blame why they couldn't have adjusted but we were winning at half time. I'm not overy upset we are not a winning team year two. We have came a long way. We will progress and have our time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Mother Grabber said:

unfortunately, Scots contribution to this board has devolved to calling other people’s posts dumb.

Yup and mine isn't that out worldly. We seriously had someone state we are a legendary Defense before we got cleaned up. There has been some quiet outrageous predictions and I'm shocked us being 8-9 is the most disliked. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We only have to win 9 games to have a winning record, we are 1/3rd of the way there through 4 games. 

We have games against eagles, vikings, giants, falcons x2, miami, pats, and WFT

We have the saints in NO which could be a tougher game than the first one.

Tougher games are Cards, Bills, Bucs x2

So out of 9 games that we should win we only have to win 6 of them to have a winning record. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, PootieNunu said:

We only have to win 9 games to have a winning record, we are 1/3rd of the way there through 4 games. 

We have games against eagles, vikings, giants, falcons x2, miami, pats, and WFT

We have the saints in NO which could be a tougher game than the first one.

Tougher games are Cards, Bills, Bucs x2

So out of 9 games that we should win we only have to win 6 of them to have a winning record. 

 

So you think the Eagles and Pats are pushovers? 

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

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...