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!

     

Steve Wilks refutes the media's perception that the Panthers "tried to tank this year"


Saca312
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

I've posted the link above already.  And I linked that tweet you posted a while ago explaining it was missing the context of the earlier questions.

Yeah.  I call BS.  He doesn't say anything about outside perception or outside chatter leading up to the comment, or in the follow up question.

Looks to me like Kunkel got this one right.

  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, poundaway said:

Yeah.  I call BS.  He doesn't say anything about outside perception or outside chatter leading up to the comment, or in the follow up question.

Looks to me like Kunkel got this one right.

Uh he definitely does. He starts the q&a talking about things outside their play that is distracting and when a reporter asks what he meant by tanking directly he says he meant things being said outside the organization 

His whole thing is this is big for the players because they ignored the noise and performed as he felt they could

Edited by mav1234
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, poundaway said:

Ok, now I call BS.  He very clearly was NOT refering to outside perceptions.  He listed HC changes, players losses and that the org was trying to tank it.

He clearly asks it as a rhetorical question meaning it’s a question that was coming from the outside, “are the organization trying to tank it” is exactly what was said.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MillionDollarCam said:

He clearly asks it as a rhetorical question meaning it’s a question that was coming from the outside, “are the organization trying to tank it” is exactly what was said.

He clarified later he was talking about things said outside too

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Move the Panthers to Raleigh said:

If we lose draft picks because of this, I may just walk out on this team

We won't. He very clearly said afterwards he meant things around the team, not from inside.

There's no way you can look at this team and think it's tanking. What decisions were made to do so?  Trading away our best offensive player? Ok, but he may have lowkey requested a trade (esp given where he ended up), and we had good backs behind him.  Refusing the Burns trade is 100% strong evidence we weren't trying to tank, as was firing Rhule.

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, poundaway said:

He did backpedal 5-6 questions later.

Believe what you want, you're going to anyway.

Wilks brought up tanking, not the media as you try to portray it.

He clarified, it isn't backpedaling. His first like minute was all about the distractions players have to deal with and how they have to focus. I don't know what to tell you, we just disagree.

So give me the examples of this team trying to tank?  He didn't have any because he said they weren't, but you apparently know they did, so I'd like to hear your rationale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MillionDollarCam said:

He clearly asks it as a rhetorical question meaning it’s a question that was coming from the outside, “are the organization trying to tank it” is exactly what was said.

There's no "the" there.

I could give you "Are our organization trying to tank it?"

But to me it sounds like "Our..our organization trying to tank it."

Either way he wasn't asked about tanking.  He listed HC and player changes and then talked about tanking.  He did backpedal 5-6 questions later.

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

    • I feel like this trade just lives rent free in people's heads and keeps morphing into different things. First thing is that the rumored trade was for future firsts. They wouldn't have any extra picks in 2023; the firsts would have been for 2024 and 2025. With very few exceptions, NFL GMs don't value picks that far away. You have to have a lot of job security to pull that off. Like Chiefs, Eagles, Rams kinda stability. That's obviously not the case with David Tepper, especially since he'd just fired his head coach. No GM except for like Howie Roseman is going to trade an asset you have now for a future asset you probably get to use.  Second, at the time you'd have to assume these are first rounders late in the first round. Obviously currency is currency and the panthers need young players, but these weren't slam dunk top ten picks. At the end of the day there's one pick that separates a first and second round pick.  Lastly, the only place that ever reported this trade was the Rams. All the reporters just repeated what McVay said and it became gospel. We have no idea how serious the negotiations were, if they ever really happened, if the offer was real, etc. And I personally believe McVay and Sneed are the kind of guys who would make up rumors like that to fug up other teams, mostly because I assume if I've thought of it someone smarter than me has.  I don't know how you'd call it the greatest draft haul of all time. Firsts quickly lose their value the farther out they are and Burns had 16.5 sacks last season. And anyway those picks would probably just been tossed into the burning inferno of the Bryce trade up so it's a moot point anyway. 
×
×
  • Create New...