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!

     

I think Matt Rhule gets one more game


PhillyB
 Share

Recommended Posts

week two of 2013 we were in season three of ron rivera's embattled tenure and a fanbase sick to their stomach and ready for his head watched his team drop a heartbreaker to the slapdick buffalo bills.

rivera blanked the giants a week later and that team went on to win the division. tepper knows this is a possibility if the team's on the brink and just needs to turn a corner.

if we drop one to the saints next week i think it's curtains.

 

  • Pie 4
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

week two of 2013 we were in season three of ron rivera's embattled tenure and a fanbase sick to their stomach and ready for his head watched his team drop a heartbreaker to the slapdick buffalo bills.

rivera blanked the giants a week later and that team went on to win the division. tepper knows this is a possibility if the team's on the brink and just needs to turn a corner.

if we drop one to the saints next week i think it's curtains.

 

I don't think Tepper knows jack poo about our past. You think he'll reference our 2013 season turnaround when assessing Rhule?

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Move the Panthers to Raleigh said:

I don't think Tepper knows jack poo about our past. You think he'll reference our 2013 season turnaround when assessing Rhule?

not directly no, but that happening was a reflection of the ability and arguably litmus test of a ball coach to turn around a foundering team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, davos said:

This is easily our worst era.  I really think it beats out the deaf mute Seifert's regime.

Seifert gave us 1999. Had no defense but our offense was so entertaining to watch, and we didn’t even make the playoffs but it came down to the last week tiebreaker. 
 

One of my most nostalgic years. Moose. Walls. Jeffers. 
 

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wundrbread33 said:

Seifert gave us 1999. Had no defense but our offense was so entertaining to watch, and we didn’t even make the playoffs but it came down to the last week tiebreaker. 
 

One of my most nostalgic years. Moose. Walls. Jeffers. 
 

 

That last week of the season was still one of the craziest, most entertaining things ever, even if we didn't get into the playoffs due to the old rules.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 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

    • Today, we are all Kucci... I miss our feral Russian attack goalie!
    • That was a good segment. Watched every minute of it and would highly recommend it to all fans.
    • "So much of what the Panthers are going to do next week isn't dictated by their preference, but by what happens above them. That's another benefit of not getting locked into need. For instance, if you're thinking you want a receiver, seeing five or six of them go off the board and reacting by taking the sixth or seventh off your list instead of the first (or second or third) something else isn't necessarily wise." https://www.panthers.com/news/ask-the-old-guy-back-into-the-weeds-of-the-nfl-draft-bryce-young-charlotte-hornets-mock-draft This is what some don't seem to get, I don't care how many times it is said: You're NOT going to draft an inferior person at one position, just because that position is perceived as, or is in fact, a bigger need. That would basically nullify, or at least lessen, the reason why you set yourself up via free agency to be able to take the BPA/BAP on the board in the first place.  Yes, the process is complex, very much involved and ongoing, but the overall philosophy is not rocket science. You set yourself up in order not to be pigeonholed into taking a lower graded player at the expense of a higher graded one. This is why Morgan, Gantt and countless of others say the same thing. This is why it's just nonsensical to set yourself in a position where you don't have to, but then act like you have to come hell or high water: "Oh, we have to draft [whatever position], and we can't draft [this position]."  I'm good with whatever they do, until proven otherwise, but even then, you have to be mature enough to know that drafting is an imperfect exercise, filled with hits and misses. And, you generally don't know if you've hit, and especially missed, right away. Moreover, like I've said before, sometimes two players--different positions or not--can both be hits on their respective teams, so in that sense, it's not purely about a right or wrong pick as much as it's about putting puzzle pieces together at the time the best way that you know how.  At the end of the day, people are going to believe what they want to believe, but one thing that's true is that what the Panthers do regarding the draft is dependent upon what others do, and what others do can and does change things. That being the case, it's just another reason why you can't go in with tunnel vision. The thought of doing that is preposterous.
×
×
  • Create New...