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!

     

Panthers fire Blackburn, Okam, and Meyer


Cdparr7
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Two of those were expected. Okam is a surprise.

That's actually the second time Rhule has fired his DL coach. Guess we're gonna have a new one every year.

I see this a lot in both College and Pro football 🏈.  The coach, who is on the Hot Seat, fires his assistant coaches.  The coach maybe either; worried about his job and wants to show changes or the coach genuinely thinks the assistants are not performing properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I don't know that people are upset due to Blackburn's firing in and of itself. I think people are more upset because Rhule--who essentially did a worse job, and is responsible for the entire clusterfug of a season--is firing fall guys as opposed to being fired himself.

As for Blackburn's work, I think that it's a little harder for the average person to evaluate ST play (as compared to offense and defense) from an analytical standpoint. And, you're right, maybe his resume is meh. 

 

I get that, but to be honest whether any of us are upset or not really doesn't matter at this point.  

As a fan I might not get the changes that i want but hopefully the changes that do happen work out.  These seem like good moves.

Our O-line was terrible.  I think most of us agree the talent might not be there but there did seem to be a lot of communication issues, which is often a by product of coaching.

D-line struggled against the run.  Pass rushing is often talent, run D is often about discipline and responsibility, which is often coaching.  

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, raleigh-panther said:

Who put them there?

at some point, the General is responsible   We are starting year three of that General 

We all get that, but the reality is it doesn't look like it's going to happen. 

Next best thing is for him to get rid of the bad coaches under him and try to replace them with better coaches.

These moves are a start.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, raleigh-panther said:

Who put them there?

at some point, the General is responsible   We are starting year three of that General 

It seems like Tepper has given Rhule a reprieve if he fires a bunch of guys - most of whom deserved to be let go anyway.  

I doubt Rhule can survive another 5 win season.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AU-panther said:

We all get that, but the reality is it doesn't look like it's going to happen. 

Next best thing is for him to get rid of the bad coaches under him and try to replace them with better coaches.

These moves are a start.

 

This is where we differ 

he did original staffing.  He had a staff year 1 (he had turnover that year too). He does staffing in year two, bigger turnover starting year 3. 

There is a saying in business that is germane here

’once can happen. Two is a problem. Three is a trend’

in my life, and in my former work position, I never allowed the ‘trend’. 

in Pro football, it is the same.  

this guy controls everything.  Every single thing.  The buck starts and stops with him and the owner who gave that power to him 
 

 

  • Beer 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

 

Can't help but notice no mention of Rhule.

This is the guy who took Zane Gonzalez, who prior to joining the Panthers had a career field goal percentage of 78% . . . JOEY SLYE numbers . . . and turned him into a guy who made 90% of his kicks for us.  He took a guy who had a career touchback percentage of 56% and helped him increase it to 63% without the benefit of an offseason to work on strength.

But Blackburn was part of the problem.

Ok.

  • Pie 5
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AU-panther said:

I know everyone wanted Rhule gone, but that doesn't look like it will happen.

Getting rid of 3 coaches that were in charge of three units that underachieved isn't a bad thing.

Guess it's just kind of coincidental that all the "bad" coaches happened to be among the guys he had the least connection with.

Weird, huh? 🤔

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Guess it's just kind of coincidental that all the "bad" coaches happened to be among the guys he had the least connection with.

Weird, huh? 🤔

Doesn’t matter.  Getting rid of some of the bad coaches is better than none of the bad coaches even if the methodology is bad. 

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

    • Um, no, just no. Bills, Chiefs, Chargers, Ravens, Bengals, Texans, Eagles, Commanders are 8 teams that it's not even a debate, they aren't trading their QB for Purdy. Patriots, Broncos, Titans, Giants, Bears, Vikings, Falcons are 7 more teams with QBs drafted in the last 2 years that also would rather stick with them than trade for Purdy as they all have more upside than he does. Lions, Packers, Cowboys, Bucs are 4 more that would likely keep their QB's as well, age aside for Goff, Dak, and Baker. Panthers and Colts are two teams in the same situation, QB's who have both struggled and shown flashes to where the teams probably stick with them because they drafted them, but in a re-draft of all QB's, they probably take Purdy over the guy they currently have. Jags, Cardinals, Dolphins, are 3 more with QB's who probably have a higher upside than Purdy but come with their own question marks, so debatable if they'd take Purdy over who they already have. That leaves Jets, Raiders, Steelers, Browns, Saints, Seahawks, and Rams. Rams would take him over Stafford for the future of course, but not for 2025, and I'd think the Seahawks would take him over Darnold, but honestly not sure if they would take him over Milroe at this moment as they really like his potential and have him for 4 years really cheap. That leaves 5 teams that I see who would absolutely take him over their current situation right now, and a handful of others who MIGHT take him over their current guy, a far cry from your 20.  
    • Agreed. Also as soon as they received the top pick in the next draft it was over. Bears won that trade. Gave up a top overall pick got one the next year plus pick 9, a couple 2nds, and DJ Moore a proven young WR. Had their 2024 pick from us be in the late teens or later it would be more debatable IMO. 
    • Option A:  Pay your starting QB starting QB money. Option B:  Look for a starting QB for 4-10 years (or longer) while wasting the talent at every other position.    How many of the top 20 QB's do you think are worth what they are being paid?   When you factor in the last year of his present deal his contract is really an average of 45 million per year which in today's QB market is a very, very good deal. I wish we'd had found a Brock Purdy to pay 50+ million a year right after we parted ways with Cam.  Ya'll go ahead and live in fairy tale land where good to great (much less elite) QB's are available to pay. Just the fact that they had the chance to pay Brock after the disaster of trading up for Lance is a testament that when you find a quarter back you can win with, complete in the playoffs and superbowls with, you pay him.  
×
×
  • Create New...