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!

     

Act as GM if we win the division….


WarPanthers89
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Sigh.   Just because he is better then rhule doesn't mean he deserves the job.  

5-1 down the stretch with Sam Darnold deserves an interview and probably the job.  These are still huge ifs, mind you - beating two division opponents, even if they are pretty bad, is still a tall task.  

I also think if we get into the playoffs but get embarrassed, well, that might change things too.

3 minutes ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

Completely agree. This situation is very similar to the Rich Bisaccia and Las Vegas Raiders last year. 

Remember this?

David Carr: Raiders don't need to look for new HC; Rich Bisaccia is the guy

https://www.nfl.com/videos/david-carr-raiders-don-t-need-to-look-for-new-hc-rich-bisaccia-is-the-guy

sure was a good thing the Raiders brain trust went in the direction they did

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Sigh.   Just because he is better then rhule doesn't mean he deserves the job.  

What would you consider a good record for a coach that had 3 different starting QBs in the same season and had to overcome the hand he was dealt? IF we make the playoffs and win the South, he deserves STRONG consideration. 

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

1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

5-1 down the stretch with Sam Darnold deserves an interview and probably the job.  These are still huge ifs, mind you - beating two division opponents, even if they are pretty bad, is still a tall task.  

I also think if we get into the playoffs but get embarrassed, well, that might change things too.

sure was a good thing the Raiders brain trust went in the direction they did

how's Rich Bisaccia doing? best he could do is get the ST coordinator job in Green Bay 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Waldo said:

They were 12-4 in 2013 and not 3 5 win seasons infront of 2014. That is a huge difference.

I would say DC the last 3 years is a better comp and they are .500 in their 3rd year after limping into the biggest loser playoff appearance and they still haven't had a winning season since, even with an extra game added last year.

People are really hanging onto that 2014 season for some reason. The 2014 team would eat this team for lunch and we ain’t gonna get lucky and play a team without their starting QB. 
 

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

12 minutes ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

Completely agree. This situation is very similar to the Rich Bisaccia and Las Vegas Raiders last year. 

Remember this?

David Carr: Raiders don't need to look for new HC; Rich Bisaccia is the guy

https://www.nfl.com/videos/david-carr-raiders-don-t-need-to-look-for-new-hc-rich-bisaccia-is-the-guy

No proof that Bisaccia wouldn’t fall on his face like every interim HC that has before him. 
Again, NO interim HC has ever had success in the playoffs and none have ever made the Super Bowl. 
I believe stats speak volumes and are right more often then wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

No proof that Bisaccia wouldn’t fall on his face like every interim HC that has before him. 
Again, NO interim HC has ever had success in the playoffs and none have ever made the Super Bowl. 
I believe stats speak volumes and are right more often then wrong. 

When was the last time an interim coach made the playoffs?

When was the last time one took a team from 1-5 to winning the division?  Yes it's a poo division. Doesn't matter.

ALL this is assuming Wilks does win the division, which I'm not certain will happen.  If it does, it says a lot about him as a coach though.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Martin said:

So are you looking for us to not use our strengths (running the ball) and instead air it out, just because? What would be an example of a modern HC thing you are looking for?

Well against every team we potentially play against in the playoffs we can’t rely on running the ball 100 percent. Like we ain’t running for 150 yards against the Cowboys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

When was the last time an interim coach made the playoffs?

When was the last time one took a team from 1-5 to winning the division?  Yes it's a poo division. Doesn't matter.

ALL this is assuming Wilks does win the division, which I'm not certain will happen.  If it does, it says a lot about him as a coach though.

It does matter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

When was the last time an interim coach made the playoffs?

When was the last time one took a team from 1-5 to winning the division?  Yes it's a poo division. Doesn't matter.

ALL this is assuming Wilks does win the division, which I'm not certain will happen.  If it does, it says a lot about him as a coach though.

Last year. Also you keep mentioning 1-5 record and yes it does matter. An interim HC having success when he is made interim is not abnormal. Most interims have success because they are injecting some newness into the team. 
Wilks success isn’t surprising. 
But, as I said before, stats don’t lie. Unless he has become some savant HC after he flamed out in Arizona. 
He will either make the playoffs but never make the Super Bowl. 
Fail once he has control because he isn’t a good HC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is tough because SO much of my plan could change over the next couple/few games. 

Darnold could make a me a believer in his ability to be a top 20 QB and I’d offer a 2-3 year deal around 8-10mil per with an out before the last year. Could be our bridge or more. 

Wilks could make me a believer that a replacement would crush the locker room. How can we hire Steichen who apparently can be a bit awkward when the players are all rallying for Wilks who’s showing great leadership skills. 

Those two decisions alone would alter too much to say definitively what my plan would be. Just winning the division may not provide enough info. There’s a possibility we could beat the Bucs and look terrible in a loss to the Saints while still winning the division. 
 

TBD for me, but this will be a fun excercise two games from now. 

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’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...