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 says the Panthers offense is about to have a "vastly different look," redefined with more of an emphasis on the run game.


SgtJoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jackie Lee said:

It's pretty dumb, but our run game was working and we just stopped doing it in the 2nd quarter when it was a 2 point game. I think most teams try to run and keep doing it til it's not working. They aren't telling people exactly who is going to run where on the field but it's also obvious running outside is our strongest option. It can at least get teams out of man coverage instead of Brady beating a dead horse 

He should have ran the ball until they proved they could stop it. It was working but for some reason Brady said hold my beer.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, pantherj said:

Yeah Teddy was a beast with horizontal offense, but that gets clogged up in the redzone. Teddy needed a monster to toss the ball up to high in the endzone, or something, but our receivers were too small. Still if you went man on us Teddy would just eat you up with DJ and company at mid-field. We were dead in the water once we got to the redzone.

Yea TB strength is just that can't take that away just like you can't take away Darnold can score TDs in the redzone. We did say in another thread if we could combine them two like Captain Planet or some poo we may be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

It's pretty dumb, but our run game was working and we just stopped doing it in the 2nd quarter when it was a 2 point game. I think most teams try to run and keep doing it til it's not working. They aren't telling people exactly who is going to run where on the field but it's also obvious running outside is our strongest option. It can at least get teams out of man coverage instead of Brady beating a dead horse 

Chubba is not good at running outside. He doesn't have the speed you need to get around the edge. That means that we are going to north and south Chubba until he is almost certainly injured. Expect Chubba to be injured going north and south this Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pantherj said:

Chubba is not good at running outside. He doesn't have the speed you need to get around the edge. That means that we are going to north and south Chubba until he is almost certainly injured. Expect Chubba to be injured going north and south this Sunday.

That's is not accurate at all.  For some reason they are not trying to run those plays.  Brady is just not allowing him to get in a rhythm but the kid is fast and can get around the edge if given just a hint of a block just like CMC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

That's is not accurate at all.  For some reason they are not trying to run those plays.  Brady is just not allowing him to get in a rhythm but the kid is fast and can get around the edge if given just a hint of a block just like CMC.

I’m very confused. Chubba best asset is breaking it outside. He can’t power back, catch or block at this point. Why are people hating on him for the one thing he’s good at?

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jon Snow said:

That's is not accurate at all.  For some reason they are not trying to run those plays.  Brady is just not allowing him to get in a rhythm but the kid is fast and can get around the edge if given just a hint of a block just like CMC.

I've seen him lose foot races around the edge with not so fast LBs. That is why the coaching staff doesn't want to use him like that imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Hubbard’s speed is fine.  I think his lower body needs more muscle.  I remember CMC struggling with first contact as a rookie.  He would go down pretty easily too in the backfield.  Came back year 2 bigger and could shake that first contact.  That’s seems to be Hubbard’s biggest weakness a runner right now.  He can’t get away from that first contact yet…and the OL just isn’t good enough to stop that from being a regular occurrence at or behind the line.  
 


 

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Harbingers said:

I’m very confused. Chubba best asset is breaking it outside. He can’t power back, catch or block at this point. Why are people hating on him for the one thing he’s good at?

In college he could hit the hole inside and sprint, because he's a sprinter. Just so happens he has a better chance of finding a hole on the edges with our O-line. No clue why people are saying he doesn't have the speed. He's a couple ankle grabs away from some 30 yard runs. If my RB had 61 yards and a TD on 16 carries without a long run I'd keep running the ball 

  • 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

    • Top 25 performance based pay in #NFL #Panthers DB Nick Scott made an extra $1.26 million from last year’s campaign, because of the NFL’s Performance-Based Pay program, the league announced today. It was the fourth-highest payout from the program. https://x.com/mike_e_kaye/status/2033598538848862446?s=46
    • BPA!!! Wouldn't life be great if it were that simple?  Need??? To some degree.  I realize that we like life simple:  Instant oatmeal.  self-stick envelopes.  I get it.  BPA people:  Go back and look at teams' needs in prior drafts--even when they scream BPA!, they end up drafting for need.  I guess you should say, "BPA4U" (Best Player Available for Us).  There are many variables. You should know the skill sets for your system.  You should understand your locker room and gauge character.  In my view, another consideration should play into your decision of how you rate a player to be the "best" and the cost of meeting your overall needs.  All needs are not equal.  The talent pool drops off and dries up at different points for different positions.  Each draft is unique.  We have inflation for some positions in free agency, yet the rookie pay scale is based on a formula that is not determined by position or player evaluations:  The 1st overall pick receives the highest salary, with each subsequent pick earning less, regardless of position.  Therefore, if you have seven needs, and three are at positions that pay veterans a ton of money--you should draft those players over those who play positions that would not save you much money.  You have to consider the savings and what that means to the cap as a whole--not just focus on BPA or need. These numbers are based on the average salary of all players and then only the starters by position: Now take a look at what the players make based on the position they are drafted: Sorry they did this in pink.  So let's say the Jets think Sadiq is the BPA on their board with the second pick.  He meets their biggest need, aside from QB, but there are no QBs close to checking the BPA box.  Are you going to pay a rookie TE $13m per year for 4 years ($52m guaranteed)?  According to the chart above, a STARTING TE costs half that.  So Need and BPA are not the only factors (this was an example only). It makes more sense to draft, especially in the first round, a QB, edge, WR, OT, or DT if they are one of your needs and one of the BPAs.  At worst you are getting close to market value if they start.   Looking at the Panthers needs, expected BPAs at #19, and cost vs. what a starting-level free agent makes, we are spending about $5m per year.  Many of us want to draft a S there--if the rookie starts, we'd save about $1.7m per year.  The difference would add a bottom-of-the-roster depth player.  If we drafted a LB, for example, the difference is $1.4m.   I see our needs (right now) as follows:  S, ILB Will, OT, C, TE, and DT.  Of those needs, a veteran starter at OT or DT would save us the most.  For example, an OT veteran who starts averages $13m.  We'd get the player for 4 years (not including the 5th year option for this) and we'd save $8m per year.  To be honest, Walker is an average OT and we got him for a bargain at $10m.  So if we draft an OT, we not only have a starter for next year (regardless of Ickey), we have 2 starting-level LTs on the roster NOW for $15m.  If the OT we draft works out and we do not re-sign Walker, we save $8m x 3 years--$24m.  So the BPA model might be the code you live or die by, but I ask it this way:  Would you rather have a Safety and $1.4m in cap room savings or an OT and $8m per year cap savings?  Both are needs.  Both would be rated in the middle of the draft's first round. The OT and the $8m in savings would get you a starting OT AND the $8m would get you a starting free agency safety, if you think about it. If you step back and see the big picture, use the rookie scale to your advantage, you can improve your roster beyond merely taking the BPA, whatever that means. Looking at the Panther's draft, if they draft OT in round 1, DT in round 2, and both start, they could save about $16m of cap space per year when compared to what average veteran free agents would cost.  LB, C, TE, and S can come later, if you follow this blueprint.   I am not saying that I would draft based solely on this concept, but I am saying that it would be a variable--a big one.   
    • nick just got a bonus-    extra 1,262,216, dang that's a nice bag...
×
×
  • Create New...