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!

     

New coach, new coordinator, new players?

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

Since it's established that a lot of folks are unhappy with the 'yo-yo' pattern of the Panthers seasons, the question can be asked as to what it takes to get off the rollercoaster and become consistent winners.

So if it's up to you to fix it, how do you get it done?

The options...

New Players? Is it just a matter of not having the right guys at a few key positions (QB, WR, DL, other)? Would getting new people in those spots via draft or free agency take the team to the next level? If so, at which spots?

New Coordinators or Assistants? Changes were made in the defensive coaching staff this past season, and now the defense - even with injuries to account for - seems to be playing better. Is a similar change needed on the offensive side among longtime assistants like Richard Williamson and Jim Skipper? Or is the answer perhaps new coordinators in place of Jeff Davidson and Danny Crossman? If this is your choice, who stays and who goes?

New Coach or GM? The most radical answer. Is the whole system infected? Is it necessary to get a whole new head coach and/or new GM? If so, why? "Fox sucks" is not a good enough answer. It needs to be justified with specific reasons.

Combinations are an option, but if you're forced to pick only one, which one do you take?

("none of the above" is, of course, also a viable choice)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JakeFlake Newbie

JakeFlake

Posted
Posted

Included under "New Coach" as an option (just not in the title)

Fox and Hurney have been described as a "package deal" before (Yasinskas). It's possible you drop one without the other, but I admit it seems unlikely.

Busted. I just think we need a football guy making the personnel decisions. That is the only thing that really bothers me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
British_Panther Newbie

British_Panther

Posted
Posted

The general thesis of the huddle is that Fox is too conservative and will make games unnecessarily close. This obviously results in an increase in the uncertainty of results and fluctuations in the W-L record from season to season even though the team doesn't necessarily get a lot better or worse.

My theory is different. In the NFL I see three types of team.

Firstly the no hopers that just don't have the all round talent to compete. These are rebuilding teams (e.g. Bucs, Rams, Chiefs) and the badly run teams (Browns, Bills, Raiders).

Secondly are the competitive teams which number about 20. They are generally well run and some years they win, others they don't. A majority of the league is so close that enough games come down to luck or a few big plays that the difference between 6-10 and 10-6 isn't all that great.

Third are the consistent winners. They probably have a great QB (Colts, Patriots) or an awesome defense (Steelers). They also have another advantage, a weak division. The Eagles and Giants would probably be consistent winners in the Colts and Patriots divisions.

The fact is that its damn hard to get 11+ wins a season unless you're going at least 4-2 in your division every year.

I estimate that if we were to hit the reset button then in 3 years we'd have a 1/6 chance

of being a consistent winner, a 1/6 chance of sucking and 2/3 chance of being about as good as we are now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhillyB Grand Master

PhillyB

Posted
Posted

Plug in a SOLID quarterback (like the Jake of old days, not spectacular, but mistake-free) and a dominant defensive tackle and suddenly this team would be cruising through games, even playing Foxball.

With the same personnel we have now, a coaching change would be necessary... either in coordinators or HC. Unfortunately, none of us on here truly know how the playcalling power is spread out, so suggesting dumping Fox over Davidson, or vice versa, is rather pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Snake Grand Master

Snake

Posted
Posted

Winning football game depends more on the Coordinators then the Coach. Give me a Good O and D coordinators and I will give you a SB. Fox has never understood that. Look what Meeks has done for our D in 1 year and look what Davidson has not done with 3. All the Coach needs to do then is let them do there job and make sure there making good choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beardosaurus Newbie

beardosaurus

Posted
Posted

One more huge receiver. Huge as in quality. We could really use that dependable second receiver, so that when defenses see them, they have to make a stand. Either stop the run, or the pass. You can't do both.

Get a new quarterback. Like the man above me said, a guy like Jake of old. No great, but has the capability of winning a game or two, and doesn't turn the ball over.

Also, a kick returner. A guy like Mark Jones was for us last year, or the way Allan Rossum used to be for Atlanta. Not a guy who is going to return every kick (which would be great to have, but hard to find), but a guy who can give you good, solid field position every single time he hits the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Troy17289TD Newbie

Troy17289TD

Posted
Posted

The general thesis of the huddle is that Fox is too conservative and will make games unnecessarily close. This obviously results in an increase in the uncertainty of results and fluctuations in the W-L record from season to season even though the team doesn't necessarily get a lot better or worse.

My theory is different. In the NFL I see three types of team.

Firstly the no hopers that just don't have the all round talent to compete. These are rebuilding teams (e.g. Bucs, Rams, Chiefs) and the badly run teams (Browns, Bills, Raiders).

Secondly are the competitive teams which number about 20. They are generally well run and some years they win, others they don't. A majority of the league is so close that enough games come down to luck or a few big plays that the difference between 6-10 and 10-6 isn't all that great.

Third are the consistent winners. They probably have a great QB (Colts, Patriots) or an awesome defense (Steelers). They also have another advantage, a weak division. The Eagles and Giants would probably be consistent winners in the Colts and Patriots divisions.

The fact is that its damn hard to get 11+ wins a season unless you're going at least 4-2 in your division every year.

I estimate that if we were to hit the reset button then in 3 years we'd have a 1/6 chance

of being a consistent winner, a 1/6 chance of sucking and 2/3 chance of being about as good as we are now.

Take you logic and reasoning elsewhere, no one's buying here.;)

Good post. Rep if I could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • MHS831
      Are the Panthers a "Trap Game" for the Hawks?

      By MHS831 · Posted

      The Seahawks won an emotional, divisional, overtime rivalry game vs the Rams on a Thursday night (Dec 18).  That gives them 10 days to prepare for the Panthers, but the Christmas holiday fell a week later--I bet they were afforded an extra day for travel-many coming back east.  Following the Panthers, Seattle plays at San Francisco for the division title (in all probability).   The Rams finish the season with games against the Falcons and Cardinals, two likely wins, pushing them to 13-4.  The Niners finish the season with home games against the Bears and Seahawks. Seattle finishes the season with the Panthers on the road and SF in California.   It is easy to see how preparing for the Panthers, during the holiday break and with the Niners waiting for them in SF a week later for (what could be) the NFC West title and #1 Seed in the NFC, could create the perfect trap game scenario.  The Panthers at home are 5-2.   In the past 2 weeks, the Seahawks struggled to beat the Phillip Rivers Colts in Seattle and then pulled off a miraculous, emotional victory at home vs. the Rams.  I am not convinced that they are as good as advertised. Seattle is a TD favorite in Charlotte.  I feel that Carolina by 3 may be more accurate.  While I am still not confident in this team's consistency and it never seems to dominate, it sure feels like a trap game for Seattle to me.  How could they NOT be thinking of San Francisco right now?  They are not used to being in this position (current players) and it is human nature.  Carolina 27, Seattle 24. 
    • MHS831
      Robert Hunt Practice Window Activated

      By MHS831 · Posted

      It is a tough decision.  There is another factor.  Is he in game shape?  A tired Hunt is not better than an "in-shape" Corbett.  When coming off an injury, it is natural to want to protect the injured area, even if it is completely healed.  This can cause you to contort your body for no reason, lose fundamentals, and it could lead to other injuries.  For example, I had a knee in high school that required getting taped.  That made me aware of the knee (not used to tape on my knee) and I pulled my groin (favoring or dragging the leg with the tape).  The trainer explained the groin injury the way I do here--but scared money makes no money.  If he is cleared to play, he is cleared to play.  Watch him, rotate him in for a series, etc.  Specifically, I would want to watch the matchup--who is winning more--Corbett or Hunt?  How is the defense reacting (if at all) to Hunt being in?  Etc.  
    • MHS831
      Chad ‘Ochstradamus’ Johnson and Shannon Sharpe on Panthers

      By MHS831 · Posted

      Shannon was sued for $50 million (settled out of court, I believe) for forcing sex on his girlfriend during a two-year relationship.  He denies it, but ESPN let him go last April.  Chad Johnson's wife filed a police report because he head-butted her in a car and was put on probation. I had to google it.  I watched the Ray Rice video and when you see it, you realize just how vile and cowardly abusing a woman really is.  But for the same point Aussie tried to make, these women are defenseless, and being phyiscally bigger and stronger does not validate your actions.   I can't even stand to watch Steve Smith.  I can't normalize this kind of behavior--again, I do not think R-P had that in mind when he posted this.  When the reason was exposed, we should realize that we are talking life (quality of) and death (in some cases) here.  
×
×
  • Create New...