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!

     

Cmac Had Only 14 Touches!!!


Catsfan69
 Share

Recommended Posts

That's the game right there. You have the best weapon in the Game you have to use him.

He needs 30 touches a game and if he got them we win. 

Hell he really only had 13 when you don't count the fumble recovery.

 

Sometimes you just have to ride your thoroughbred. 

 

Our OC doesn't seem any smarter this year than last.

Edited by Catsfan69
  • Pie 2
  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WarHeel said:

I liked his moderately conservative use. I don’t like how the rest of the offense went AWOL with the exception of a couple deep passes to Thomas and Robbie.

 

Get more folks involved on the offense, improve the D-line, and stop fumbling the damn ball and we win this game.

You gotta ride your studs in pro sports.

He's our only actual Weapon. 

DJ is good but not great.

Cmac is the best in the world at what he does.

  • Pie 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

You gotta ride your studs in pro sports.

He's our only actual Weapon. 

DJ is good but not great.

Cmac is the best in the world at what he does.

Yeah, let’s run him into the ground like we have for 5 years straight. That’s worked out well the last two years for our record and his health.

  • Pie 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WarHeel said:

Yeah, let’s run him into the ground like we have for 5 years straight. That’s worked out well the last two years for our record and his health.

His health wasn't that bad.

 

If we had been in contention he would have played. 

You know how you get out of contention in a hurry? You lose to The Browns in a winnable game. 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I thought we used him too much early on last year, but this was the worst game plan I’ve ever seen with a healthy CMC.  Volume aside, the offensive play calling didn’t do much to get him the ball in space.

Yeah his first few touches were runs up the middle? I thought McAdoo had 5 waffle house menus of play calls. Looked worse than preseason play calls in the first half

  • Pie 2
  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, hepcat said:

If he got 30 touches he’d get injured by week 3 like he always does 

Lol that's simply not true.

Soft tissue stuff is random.

We need him to win the game. What good is saving him if doing so costs you the game?

 

That sounds like my ex wife every time she spent money. I saved 49%.

I had to explain that if you spend 100% of our money at 49% off we still have zero money.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sweetness averaged 24 touches.

Emmit 22 but there was some injury years but at his peak 28 touches per game.

Faulk had low overall use amongst the greats at about 20 per overall but had years averging 29 touches per game.

 

So most hall of fame backs at their peak were being ridden 27,28,30 times a game.

 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Sweetness averaged 24 touches.

Emmit 22 but there was some injury years but at his peak 28 touches per game.

Faulk had low overall use amongst the greats at about 20 per overall but had years averging 29 touches per game.

 

So most hall of fame backs at their peak were being ridden 27,28,30 times a game.

 

I'm fine with 18-25 a game for CMC.... but dang use the weapon early 3 of of those touches were dumb up the gut into a 10 man box 58 minutes into the game and anther one we don't even know if he was going to get the ball on the play because of the bad snap.

  • Pie 2
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...