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!

     

Who could Wilks call for help?


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Suppose current OC Ben McAdoo continues to not be able to cut the mustard? Where could interim head coach Steve Wilks turn for help?

Obviously, you can't install a new offensive system in the middle of the season. That would leave Wilks searching for an on-staff replacement, with quarterback coach Sean Ryan likely being the only viable option.

But if Wilks we're to, say, reach out to someone who could come on board as a consultant to maybe call plays or assist in some other fashion, who would some of the options be?

Looking back at his history, the following names present themselves...

Norv Turner, Retired, Former Panthers OC

Turner and Wilks have worked together twice, first in San Diego then with Carolina. Norv would be readily available (as long as his wife agrees).

Jim Skipper, Retired, Former Panthers RB Coach

Skipper and Wilks we're on the Panthers staff together for a bit and he's been an OC before.

Freddie Kitchens, Senior Analyst, University of South Carolina

Kitchens has a consultant type role already at the college level. He and Wilkes were together in Cleveland along with OL Coach James Campen.

Rob Chudzinski, Special Assistant to the Head Coach,  Boston College

Another current college consultant, and an acquaintance of Wilks from their Charger days.

Todd Haley, Head Coach, Tampa Bay Bandits (USFL)

Haley was let go from the Browns and replaced with Kitchens. He's technically got a full-time job but this is his offseason.

________________________

Not a great best, but not a terrible one either.

Mind you, there are other potentially better options but most of them are currently employed elsewhere in the NFL.

Can't say I really expect anything like this to happen, but there are options at least.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • 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

    • Yep. I was hoping for and calling for a day three guy. But I didn’t research the position to say if we should or should‘t have jumped at a particular guy at a particular spot.    And everything I read said it was a poor draft for RBs depth wise. I guess when Seattle takes a backup RB in the 1st, that kind of backs that up.    I definitely think we should keep 4 running backs and if King can play well enough then keep him too.    I believe I heard Canales say we are a running team (talking about drafting a WR he will be needing to block as well as catch). Well if we are gonna be a running team by identity we don’t need to stock the WR room to overflowing. If one room has to sacrifice, it should not be the RB room given our circumstances. 
    • If there's a pattern I'm definitely picking up from Dan and company is a philosophy of making trades where we try not to sacrifice the number of draft picks we have by day's end. In other words, we're not giving up three picks for one, or giving up a future pick to make a pick today. And even if we give up something at the start, we make trades later to make up for that initial loss. Here's how it stacked up for 2026: How we started: 19, 51, 83, 119, 158, 159, 200 How we ended: 19, 49, 83, 129, 144, 151, 227 (no future picks sacrificed) Ultimately, we moved up two spots in the second to ensure we got someone we coveted, gave up a few spots for our fourth round pick, but then had better picks in the 5th (and got really good value out of them), and had a worse 7th rounder which isn't that big of a loss anyways.  At this point, we can question who they draft, but they're pretty good maneuvering across the draft board.
    • I just saw the funniest thing...or very disappointing, depending how you handle misery. A guy on YouTube did a 2027 'way too early' mock draft.  If I told you the simulator has the Panthers selecting in the top 10 , what would you say?  If I told you it was pick #8 and only two QBs were taken in the top 7, what would you say?  If I told you this dude had us taking a defensive player, what would you say?
×
×
  • Create New...