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!

     

This chart shows how bad the Panthers' future is (WARNING: WILL MAKE YOU WANT TO ROPE)


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Evil Hurney said:

That x-axis seems kinda dumb unless you think a 2nd and 3rd round pick are worth ~$80M in cap space.

According to this chart the Saints are considered to have more "resources" when in reality the difference between the Panthers and Saints is one team having a 2nd and 3rd round pick as well as ~$80M less cap space.

And we get a bunch of cap space after this year. Backload a couple of contracts, draft nothing but online this year, and the future starts looking better.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, chknwing said:

I full faith in Thumbo that he will get this all straighten out.  

i googled thumbo

 

SHAKY CAM SHAKY CAM

You guys really should randomly google poo

Man'll be platinum afore you know it

Edited by Fox007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cookinbrak said:

And we get a bunch of cap space after this year. Backload a couple of contracts, draft nothing but online this year, and the future starts looking better.

Great to see see someone on the Huddle have a positive take and outlook. This place is getting down right depressing to view.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

A single trade down and a couple contract restructures/cuts and we move upward right. the data doesn’t support future state, it only supports current state.

Current state does enable same offseason future state flexibility tho. We can recover some ground but the point is how far below other teams in our same wins situation we are.  Even the scenario you describe doesn't move us very far probably because I suspect it's weighting our first rounder based on where it is, and that is the kind of move other teams could make too.

I don't think this is a figure that says "be pessimistic about 2022 no matter what," but it does suggest what we already know just from limited cap space and missing our 2nd and 3rd rounders because we traded for rehab projects.  Oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cookinbrak said:

And we get a bunch of cap space after this year. Backload a couple of contracts, draft nothing but online this year, and the future starts looking better.

I agree 2023 looks brighter than 2022 right now.  But we have to hope Rhule and Fitt are being handicapped on what future assets they can trade, or the future gets a lot dimmer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jesse said:

And this is precisely why I don’t think Rhule was canned this year. We’re not going to attract any decent coach with that outlook. 

I’ll keep repeating this… 

Do you think allowing Rhule to stay another season will in any way make the team more attractive NEXT year?  Do you think Rhule is just going to idly sit on his hands and allow future resources he can use NOW to remain untouched?  Or do you think he’ll use whatever resources he can, present and future, to try to save his own fat neck?

Edited by tiger7_88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tiger7_88 said:

I’ll keep repeating this… 

Do you think allowing Rhule to stay another season will in any way make the team more attractive NEXT year?  Do you think Rhule is just going to idly sit on his hands and allow future resources he can use NOW to remain untouched?  Or do you think he’ll use whatever resources he can, present and future, to try to save his own fat neck?

This is the worst part about keeping him. I can take another losing season, but, with no reward in the draft, we're screwed.

  • 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

    • I think he did a solid job.  Honestly I liked his post game interview the best.  He gave himself a C and said he left a lot out on the field.  That kind of attitude can carry him far.
    • This is lacking a fairly considerable amount of context. For one, Adams(age 22) started 12 of 16 games, had 38 rec, 446 yds and 3 TD's on 66 targets(18 less, with 2 less games started). The main thing missing here is that the top two WR's for Green Bay that year combined for about 2800 yds and 25 TD's. Now if you want to throw a more accurate dart at Adams, take a look at year two. This year the production was spread around considerably and Adams didn't stand out from that pack(pun not intended).  So, if XL struggles mightily this season, I would probably keep that comparison in your quiver to counter argue. I would suggest that I don't think that scenario is probably very accurate for most HOF caliber WR's taken in the first round over the past 15 or so years. Adams was the 89th pick overall, as well. A little different hill to climb than XL, although not massively.
    • to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
×
×
  • Create New...