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!

     

Scott Fowler interview with Matt Rhule ‘fans sealed his fare’


raleigh-panther
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, raleigh-panther said:

It was a verbatim, taped Q&A  it wasn’t supposed to be short 

I mean, really, with Rhule, it would never have been short anyway

i give Cam Newton credit.  His exit interview last year told the story. 

Too bad Tepper didn’t listen and by not listening it has cost an additional 3 years of a rebuild that wasn’t needed

I could not stand this putz  from the day he was hired 

my professional bullshit meter pegged him the moment he opened his mouth 
 

 

Yeah, just to be fair I wasn't saying the interview was too long. I just did the TLDR for people that you know just don't read full articles.  (If this is your own personal transcript my bad wasn't trying to step on your toes lol) I of course did find it interesting so I read it lol.

Either way, yeah, I just feel like Rhule didn't give away much of anything, playing it close to the chest. But he did give a few explosive gems and questionable statements on the way out mixed in.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He keeps doubling down on "having more time", but I think he's missing a major point.  Even with a 5 year rebuild plan, you should see SOME improvement by year 3, right? 

The way he talks, its as if he's saying "I expected to suck year 1, suck year 2, suck year 3, suck year 4, THEN by year 5 win a super bowl because it's a 5 year plan."  Delusional that he thinks that was OK.

  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MickMixon'sMetaphors said:

He keeps doubling down on "having more time", but I think he's missing a major point.  Even with a 5 year rebuild plan, you should see SOME improvement by year 3, right? 

The way he talks, its as if he's saying "I expected to suck year 1, suck year 2, suck year 3, suck year 4, THEN by year 5 win a super bowl because it's a 5 year plan."  Delusional that he thinks that was OK.

He was talking about year 4 during OTA's this past summer. Like really already trying to brace the fans and media for a losing record before training camp even started? There's a handful of guys that have since disappeared on here that were sucking those pressers up though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Rhule fan and was always cautiously optimistic after the hiring, but if Tepper gave him such a big contract is it not possible he was actually TOLD he had 4-5 years to get things going?  Tepper coming from watching the Steelers and how they built something long term, it is not that crazy.  It just gives some weight to the big contract to a new coach.  I'm just saying, I think Tepper deserves the same amount of hate if not more than Rhule here.  And it is true about the cap and not keeping some guys or getting some others.  I'm not defending Rhule, he was bad, and he left great players to sit on the bench that could have been in there.  He definitely sucked as a coach in a lot of ways and you can't blame Tepper for not playing Foreman or Bozeman.  But Tepper poo the bed as much as anyone and is hoping we just blame Rhule for it all.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Zaximus said:

I'm not a Rhule fan and was always cautiously optimistic after the hiring, but if Tepper gave him such a big contract is it not possible he was actually TOLD he had 4-5 years to get things going?  

I doubt he was ever told he had 4-5 years to get things going.  More than likely, Tepper told him he wanted to see the team be a consistent winner in 4-5 years.  But if Matt Rhule thinks that meant he didn't have to show some improvement after a couple of years, he truly is a fool.  Not only did the team not show signs of improvement, it actually seemed worse.  

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

I doubt he was ever told he had 4-5 years to get things going.  More than likely, Tepper told him he wanted to see the team be a consistent winner in 4-5 years.  But if Matt Rhule thinks that meant he didn't have to show some improvement after a couple of years, he truly is a fool.  Not only did the team not show signs of improvement, it actually seemed worse.  

Biggest indictment to me was watching the team the 1st game under Wilks. They played with more fire and energy than I have seen in a long time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davidson Deac II said:

I doubt he was ever told he had 4-5 years to get things going.  More than likely, Tepper told him he wanted to see the team be a consistent winner in 4-5 years.  But if Matt Rhule thinks that meant he didn't have to show some improvement after a couple of years, he truly is a fool.  Not only did the team not show signs of improvement, it actually seemed worse.  

He probably wasn’t told that but giving him that contract sure implied that it. Rhule doesn’t have what it takes to win as an NFL coach. A winning NFL head coach has a combination of well above average intelligence while also being a strong leader of men. Rhule is neither of these. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

I doubt he was ever told he had 4-5 years to get things going.  More than likely, Tepper told him he wanted to see the team be a consistent winner in 4-5 years.  But if Matt Rhule thinks that meant he didn't have to show some improvement after a couple of years, he truly is a fool.  Not only did the team not show signs of improvement, it actually seemed worse.  

Exactly. He was fired because the team was actively worse, not because they weren't suddenly winning every game in 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zaximus said:

I'm not a Rhule fan and was always cautiously optimistic after the hiring, but if Tepper gave him such a big contract is it not possible he was actually TOLD he had 4-5 years to get things going?  Tepper coming from watching the Steelers and how they built something long term, it is not that crazy.  It just gives some weight to the big contract to a new coach.  I'm just saying, I think Tepper deserves the same amount of hate if not more than Rhule here.  And it is true about the cap and not keeping some guys or getting some others.  I'm not defending Rhule, he was bad, and he left great players to sit on the bench that could have been in there.  He definitely sucked as a coach in a lot of ways and you can't blame Tepper for not playing Foreman or Bozeman.  But Tepper poo the bed as much as anyone and is hoping we just blame Rhule for it all.

It's possible. Honestly, it's consistent with some of Tepper's own public statements.

And yes, Tepper absolutely deserves whatever he gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zaximus said:

I'm not a Rhule fan and was always cautiously optimistic after the hiring, but if Tepper gave him such a big contract is it not possible he was actually TOLD he had 4-5 years to get things going?  Tepper coming from watching the Steelers and how they built something long term, it is not that crazy.  It just gives some weight to the big contract to a new coach.  I'm just saying, I think Tepper deserves the same amount of hate if not more than Rhule here.  And it is true about the cap and not keeping some guys or getting some others.  I'm not defending Rhule, he was bad, and he left great players to sit on the bench that could have been in there.  He definitely sucked as a coach in a lot of ways and you can't blame Tepper for not playing Foreman or Bozeman.  But Tepper poo the bed as much as anyone and is hoping we just blame Rhule for it all.

You still have to show progress, not go backwards

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

    • You may be interested to know that the average depth of separation is dependent upon the type of route run. Though go-routes are the most type of route run, they also produce the least amount of separation (and, of course, completions).   "The average pass catcher runs a go route on nearly a quarter of all routes (22.3%), the highest percentage of any route type in our data. However, those routes are targeted roughly 1 out of 10 times (10.8 percent), the lowest target rate of any route. The WR screen is the least-run route (3.4%), and it's the only route where the average target is behind the line of scrimmage. But it's also targeted at the highest rate (40.7%) and early in the play (1.6 seconds average time to throw). The most targeted routes outside of the WR Screen? The out (27.8%) and slant (25.2%) routes are the next most popular across the league."     "The most valuable routes by expected points added per target were the post (+0.48) and corner (+0.43) routes. The go route (+0.19) ranked seventh on the list of 10 route types. The go route (+0.19) ranked seventh on the list of 10 route types. One possible reason for this: It's harder to separate on go routes, which put the player on a straight path, than on posts or corners, which ask the player to make a cut. Targeted pass catchers on posts and corners average 2.4 yards and 2.3 yards of separation from the nearest defender, respectively, while pass catchers targeted on go routes average just 1.8 yards of separation."   https://www.nfl.com/news/next-gen-stats-intro-to-new-route-recognition-model#:~:text=Targeted pass catchers on posts,) and slant (+0.26).   I would expect that Thielen would have an easier time catching the ball based that he runs the routes where it's easier to get open. Tet? Yet to be seen, but we may be better served getting him on some slants and crossers also.  In general, receivers are going to average a lower completion percentage and yards of separation on certain types of routes than others, that's why we shouldn't necessarily be taking stats, even advanced ones, at face value, as there are dynamics that most aren't even thinking about.  In terms of Tet, he's bigger and somewhat slower than a smaller dude, so you'd expect him not to have as much separation on go-routes, but his catch radius is massive and his hands are awesome. Hitting him in stride will probably be killer, but of course QBs are less accurate on go-routes according to the stats. Depending upon Tet's route versatility and how he is used, we could have a unicorn though. He's relatively fast, has great hands and gets YAC (and on an off note, if X can hold on to the ball, he's dangerous as well because he already has shown some separation ability).    
    • Most elite WRs aren't necessarily burners. Not a lot of elite WRs in the modern era were 4.3 guys. If anything, sometimes it seems like the super fast guys use their speed as a crutch and it hampers their development in the intricacies of route running.
×
×
  • Create New...