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!

     

Official 49ers at Panthers GameDay Thread


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

Do you realize the #1 city for transplants to Charlotte is surprise.......San Francisco......due to the banking industry. 

After that then it is update NY in the Syracuse area followed by Pittsburgh and Eastern Ohio..........all are rust belt areas of course.......with a younger demographic moving to this part of the country.

It is difficult to establish an expansion team fan base to begin with...............especially one in which the town is known for transplants like Charlotte............

Sure they got lots of bandwagon fans as a novelty during their 2nd year playoff run......and when they had their two SB runs...........but you see what's left in the core fan base during losing seasons like now.

Charlotte....is often referred to as the town people move to for finding jobs but go somewhere else on the weekends for fun. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised a single game thread for a poorly run organization, crappy product and substandard performance actually garnered 107 pages of posts.

My question is this: if you're willing to invest your valuable time and effort into a historically poor performer, why not find one of the worst performing stocks on the NYSE and put your hard-earned savings there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, am I reading this wrong?  Here is a quote from Rhule's post-game press conference:

RE: The guys came out early in the 3rd quarter with the Christian [McCaffrey] touchdown. What and who was behind the decision to go for two that early in the quarter?

Yeah, you know, down 14 with the ball on the one. Had the ball had not been on the one, we wouldn’t have done it. I think we have talked a couple times, down 14 now, there is kind of the whole analytics movement to go for two and make it a one-score game. The time was pretty close to the vest. We held them to really 10 points on defense. So, had it been on the two, we wouldn’t have done it but with the ball on the one, feeling like with Christian [McCaffrey] we could hopefully punch it in from a yard out.

Uh, the score was 17-9 when they faced that decision.  It was already a one-score game, and kicking the point (which would have been snapped from either the 7.5 or 10 because of the penalty) would have made it a 7-point deficit.  Going for two would not "make it a one-score game."

I get the ball on the 1-yard line logic, but when was the last time we were any good at short-yardage situations?  Somewhere in his vast knowledge of "analytics" our poor track record at those situations has to enter in.  We just came out and made the score competitive to start the half, given the situation, why give their defense a chance to diffuse any momentum from the TD drive?

But even given that difference in philosophy, the basis of his argument seems to be "down 14," and making it a one-score game by going for two.  The math doesn't make it any better down by 14, but okay. 

Am I being overly critical, or does his statement sound like he was unaware of the situation?  Or is this just the latest case of a BS artist BS-ing to insert "analytics" into the conversation to try and sound like the smartest guy in the room or appeal to an owner who claims to embrace analytics?"

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sgt Schultz said:

OK, am I reading this wrong?  Here is a quote from Rhule's post-game press conference:

RE: The guys came out early in the 3rd quarter with the Christian [McCaffrey] touchdown. What and who was behind the decision to go for two that early in the quarter?

Yeah, you know, down 14 with the ball on the one. Had the ball had not been on the one, we wouldn’t have done it. I think we have talked a couple times, down 14 now, there is kind of the whole analytics movement to go for two and make it a one-score game. The time was pretty close to the vest. We held them to really 10 points on defense. So, had it been on the two, we wouldn’t have done it but with the ball on the one, feeling like with Christian [McCaffrey] we could hopefully punch it in from a yard out.

Uh, the score was 17-9 when they faced that decision.  It was already a one-score game, and kicking the point (which would have been snapped from either the 7.5 or 10 because of the penalty) would have made it a 7-point deficit.  Going for two would not "make it a one-score game."

I get the ball on the 1-yard line logic, but when was the last time we were any good at short-yardage situations?  Somewhere in his vast knowledge of "analytics" our poor track record at those situations has to enter in.  We just came out and made the score competitive to start the half, given the situation, why give their defense a chance to diffuse any momentum from the TD drive?

But even given that difference in philosophy, the basis of his argument seems to be "down 14," and making it a one-score game by going for two.  The math doesn't make it any better down by 14, but okay. 

Am I being overly critical, or does his statement sound like he was unaware of the situation?  Or is this just the latest case of a BS artist BS-ing to insert "analytics" into the conversation to try and sound like the smartest guy in the room or appeal to an owner who claims to embrace analytics?"

Wouldn't be a big shock if that was the moment Tepper decided he was going to fire Rhule this morning. Simply don't see the rationale of even attempting a 2 point conversion in that scenario, especially with an inept offense that struggles to get into the end zone. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2022 at 6:29 PM, stbugs said:

That’s what I was told.

@Basbear Any thoughts? Seems to me into year 2, he’s a liability and we would have been better off drafting a CB.

Hes had about one bad result per game, some of which he was in great position and the others just plain beat/poor tech/etc. Hes as good as any 4th rounder(Im taking in the 5th and 3rd= 4th). Again given that JC Horn(main reason the trade happened, that you and 11 forget) is on the other side, CJ will get attention 10/10. Hes not played at his 9th overall pick status, but not dog meat either. Hes only getting 3mill per year, theres PLENTY of CBs out getting 8 digits and playing poorer/sim..... 

I will he is slightly playing below my expectations 

Edited by Basbear
  • 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

    • It all sounds great. The only unknowns are injuries and how they will need to be addressed. Horn has a history as does the newly added Jaelen Phillips and Cooker has yet to play an entire season as well. And then there are the Ikey's - totally unexpecteded injuries that put a major wrench in your plans. I do think its a great plan though.
    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
×
×
  • Create New...