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

    • tukafan21
      If you could add one player from any team in the NFL to the 2025 Panthers to make them Super Bowl contenders, who would it be?

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't disagree, but you're not giving our offense enough credit, and I'm not saying we would win the SB, just that we would be contenders, which we would have been. The Bengals had a horrible start to the season last year and it caused them to just miss the playoffs by one game, but had they made it, they absolutely would have been contenders in the AFC.  They had a bad defense, probably worse than ours will be this year, and you can't convince me that we don't have a better offensive roster than they had last year.   We have a Top 10 OL, two 1k rushers from last year, two 1st round WRs, one of the best slot WRs in the league, and then Coker.  Like I said, their Top 2 WRs are better than ours will be this year, but we take them in every other spot, OL, RBx2, and our 3rd/4th WRs.   If Burrow was able to turn that team into a contender last year, no reason he couldn't do the same with our roster this year.  And hell, I think our offensive roster is better than KC's last year too, and while I know their defense did a lot of the heavy lifting last year, if you give Mahomes an improved offensive roster around him, he's going to be THAT much better himself. A Mahomes, Burrow, or Allen would be able to win the South by outscoring teams.  And yes, come playoff time against an Eagles or Lions juggernaut, our defense probably costs us the game, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't at least be contenders. If Bryce can prove me wrong and his supporters here right, and be THAT guy for us this year, I genuinely think we can be a real playoff threat in 2026 once we add a few more pieces to the defense and then be a genuine SB contender in 2027 if the team keeps improving. We're the 2022 Detroit Lions right now.   Great offensive pieces, tons of holes on defense, but if things go right we'll just miss the playoffs (like they did) and then be right in the playoff hunt the next year (like they did) and then be contenders the following season (like they did when they were the #1 seed).
    • amcoolio
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By amcoolio · Posted

      Hornets have had the worst luck of any professional sports franchise this century. Constantly drafting a slot below the generational talent, all because of the lottery done behind closed doors. It's been brutal and frankly unfair to be a diehard fan of this franchise, and I don't blame anyone for cutting out the stress.
    • kungfoodude
      ESPN's Top 10 Impact Rookies(non-1st Round)

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      We will see if there is any logic to those sort of packages. I haven't seen a ton of evidence that Evero operates that way.
×
×
  • Create New...