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

    • The reset worked with proton.me.. wouldn’t work with my Gmail, Yahoo or Verizon email accounts 
    • Wish they started at 5:30 or 6 at the latest so I can watch it. I have to be in bed by start time.
    • okay I found this and it sounds like my hopes for the first surgery being not such a great job seems like it could be actual reality.  I only hoped because that would give a better chance for recovery and ia a possible scenario so I just thought it could be possible. Had no real evidence of it. But I’ll be damned.    This is a detailed report of Brooks’ surgery and the condition of his knee after the failed repair.     https://x.com/jmthrivept/status/2055743129408704806?s= Sparked by some very good questions by @CoachspeakIndex, here’s some info on Jonathon Brooks: 1. Speculation that the first graft/ACLR by Dr. Cooper didn’t “take” or at least was too lax, leading to failure and re-tear. Brooks dealt with issues cutting, progressing in his rehab into the early stages of 2024 and then re-tore it late 2024, requiring a second ACLR in January 2025 (essentially revision). Notably, CAR prolonged Brooks’ rehab process through Sept-Oct due to issues progressing into the next stages of rehab. 2. Second surgery performed by Dr. Neal ElAttrache, who has extensive experience with revisions. He did a double bundle technique, harvesting graft from Brooks’ left patellar tendon and a strip of his right IT Band (his right patellar tendon had been utilized for the prior graft in 2023. The double bundle technique significantly increases rotational stability of the knee, leading to a stronger and more secure graft/reconstruction. Also to note, Brooks’ surgery wasn’t significantly delayed, meaning that the tunnels from his prior ACLR were in good shape and they didn’t need to perform bone grafts to fill in (would have delayed 2nd surgery by 5-6 months). Essentially, reading the tea leaves tells me that everything else except for the graft itself was still in good quality within his knee. Good sign for future.  3. Typically, you see a performance increase anywhere from 16-20 months post-revision. Brooks will be ~21 months out from his second surgery by the time Week 1 hits. His knee should be more stable and stronger this time around, with adequate time for healing and return to all movement patterns. I’m not viewing this situation as a typical “Player __ had TWO ACL tears, he’s cooked” situation. Rather, I’m viewing it as the first procedure failed, but the second procedure is significantly stronger and should allow him to return to form this time around. I don’t know why it posted as a link but there it is.  
×
×
  • Create New...