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!

     

Rhule set to appear on WFNZ Thursday morning

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, BurnNChinn said:

So don’t know if anyone caught this but near 17:50 mark of the interview he’s talking about BC and this upcoming draft. He says whatever Panthers decide to do at #6 in the draft. Is that me or should he be saying who we decide to take in this years draft? 

Nah he is passing blame.  He did that a few times in the interview.  It wasnt conspicuous. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monrowed Grand Master

Monrowed

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, trueblade said:

In case you are out of the area and didn't hear the interview, he's what Rhule said about Slater.

 

As @Zod said, I too, am less confident in Rhule than I was yesterday.

To be fair and honest, he also said something that is missing from the quote. He said that because Slater had missed the prior year and he did not have the ideal measurable they were not comfortable taking him ahead of Penai or Jaycee. He did not say that they would not have taken Slater if the other two were not there.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Monrowed said:

To be fair and honest, he also said something that is missing from the quote. He said that because Slater had missed the prior year and he did not have the ideal measurable they were not comfortable taking him ahead of Penai or Jaycee. He did not say that they would not have taken Slater if the other two were not there.

He said it was too high for a guard.  So fug him

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KSpan Grand Master

KSpan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Monrowed said:

To be fair and honest, he also said something that is missing from the quote. He said that because Slater had missed the prior year and he did not have the ideal measurable they were not comfortable taking him ahead of Penai or Jaycee. He did not say that they would not have taken Slater if the other two were not there.

I have trouble thinking anything Rhule says is honest/transparent at this point. Dude has zero credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catsfan69 Grand Master

Catsfan69

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Monrowed said:

To be fair and honest, he also said something that is missing from the quote. He said that because Slater had missed the prior year and he did not have the ideal measurable they were not comfortable taking him ahead of Penai or Jaycee. He did not say that they would not have taken Slater if the other two were not there.

People seem to be leaving this part out of the thread.

I like that he admitted making a mistake with how he played BC but I also liked how he said he didn't want to David Carr BC.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
thunderraiden Veteran

thunderraiden

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Again, I have no clue what this moron was thinking when he said that.  That is literally the worst possible answer he could have given.

Honestly its so bad and getting so much national attention from players and personel it's embarrassing. It is all over my twitter feed from national reporters and entities.

Edited by thunderraiden
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrcompletely11 Grand Master

mrcompletely11

Posted
Posted
Just now, thunderraiden said:

Honestly its so bad and getting so much national attention from players and personel it's embarrassing. It is all over my twitter feed from national reporters.

As soon as I heard it and posted it I figured people were going to have a field day with it.  Hopefully it shames the motherfuger into drafting a tackle at 6

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
17 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

He would have cut Sam Mills.  Seriously-as a player, I imagine that he was told things like, "you are too small, too short, too slow, etc."  He now applies these idealistic measurables to players and it is blinding him.

Matt Rhule and Marty Hurney are at opposite ends of the spectrum on this.

Rhule is unable to see that certain players who don't fit the ideal "checkboxes" often have intangibles and other factors that make them very good players.

By contrast, Marty looked at non-ideal players and saw those intangibles and other factors when they weren't actually there.

  • Pie 3
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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...