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!

     

WINS AND LOSSES


scratched
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, SazmoRanger said:

Again, I said the offense should be better and defense should take a step back. Not sure what you’re arguing. This will be an improved team, but this isn’t going to be a 9+ win team. 

That sounds like 2020

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SazmoRanger said:

Lol yes… Have you not seen how horrible he’s been with that?

 

Again, I said the offense should be better and defense should take a step back. Not sure what you’re arguing. This will be an improved team, but this isn’t going to be a 9+ win team. 

I can tell you what I hope. I hope we will be competitive in the first and second half. I hope that we will make better adjustments on offense and defense after halftime. I expect that  adding Wilkes will improve our secondary to the point our line can avoid selling out to get pressure and get gashed around the end on every run.  I think Pasqualoni will run more stunts and use more 4 and 5 man fronts. I think that guys like Wilkes will help Snow tremendously and teach him about nfl adjustments. Snow is smart and inclusive so I don't think the defense steps back in points allowed  and passing defense. Running yards per play should go down as will sacks if we stop the run first which is the mantra of just about every defensive coordinator.

I find it hard to pinpoint an exact record or game by game result given injuries and other issues like Covid. But I am taking the over on the Vegas line of 6.5 wins. It went up a half game due to Baker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SazmoRanger said:

I just don’t see us winning too many games with or without Baker/CMC. We’ve had games the last few years we should’ve easily won and yet find ways to lose, convincingly. Also, we lost our last 7 games last year and it wasn’t even close. Not even competitive. 

Browns - Toss up

Giants - Toss up

Saints - Toss up

Cardinal - Loss

49ers - Loss

Rams - Loss 

Bucs - Loss

Falcons - Toss Up

Bengals - Loss

Falcons - Toss Up

Ravens - Loss

Broncos - Loss

Seahawks - Win

Steelers - Loss

Lions - Toss Up

Bucs - Loss

Saints - Toss up

 

Going through the schedule I have 8 games that I can see us having a realistic chance at winning. I feel we can beat the Falcons, Saints, Seahawks, Giants, and Browns. 
 

I’d say at BEST we split with the Saints. We’re 2-9 against them in our last 11 meetings. That’s down to 7 wins. 
 

We’re also 3-8 against the Falcons in the past 11 meetings, so I’d say we’d split with them too. That’s down to 6 wins. 
 

That leaves the Giants and Browns. Browns I’d lean to a loss as it’s the first game of the season and Giants are a true wild card. Should be a W, but they beat us by 22 points last year. So let’s say we split those games as one W and one L. That brings us to 5 wins. 
 

Realistically, we’re looking at a 5-7 win season. I’m sure out offense will be improved, but our defense will probably take a step back. Fun times. 
 

 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, SazmoRanger said:

I just don’t see us winning too many games with or without Baker/CMC. We’ve had games the last few years we should’ve easily won and yet find ways to lose, convincingly. Also, we lost our last 7 games last year and it wasn’t even close. Not even competitive. 

Browns - Toss up

Giants - Toss up

Saints - Toss up

Cardinal - Loss

49ers - Loss

Rams - Loss 

Bucs - Loss

Falcons - Toss Up

Bengals - Loss

Falcons - Toss Up

Ravens - Loss

Broncos - Loss

Seahawks - Win

Steelers - Loss

Lions - Toss Up

Bucs - Loss

Saints - Toss up

 

Going through the schedule I have 8 games that I can see us having a realistic chance at winning. I feel we can beat the Falcons, Saints, Seahawks, Giants, and Browns. 
 

I’d say at BEST we split with the Saints. We’re 2-9 against them in our last 11 meetings. That’s down to 7 wins. 
 

We’re also 3-8 against the Falcons in the past 11 meetings, so I’d say we’d split with them too. That’s down to 6 wins. 
 

That leaves the Giants and Browns. Browns I’d lean to a loss as it’s the first game of the season and Giants are a true wild card. Should be a W, but they beat us by 22 points last year. So let’s say we split those games as one W and one L. That brings us to 5 wins. 
 

Realistically, we’re looking at a 5-7 win season. I’m sure out offense will be improved, but our defense will probably take a step back. Fun times. 
 

 

 

 

Every season there are teams that are predicted to do well, but for different reasons have much worse records than predicted. If you look strictly at strength of schedule it is formidable. However, by the same token there are teams that rise from the ashes. In 2014 the Panthers were 7-8-1. In 2015 the Panthers were in the Super Bowl. We shall see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Stuart Smith said:

 

Every season there are teams that are predicted to do well, but for different reasons have much worse records than predicted. If you look strictly at strength of schedule it is formidable. However, by the same token there are teams that rise from the ashes. In 2014 the Panthers were 7-8-1. In 2015 the Panthers were in the Super Bowl. We shall see.

Well of course, but you’re talking about the Panthers that have only won 5 games every season for the past 3 years. I’m not going to believe they’ll make a huge jump into the playoffs until I see it. Just like I’m not going to believe the Chiefs miss the playoffs this year unless I see it. Could that happen? Sure, but it’s not likely based on the last 3 years. 

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

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...