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!

     

Is there still a case for Wilks?

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Cdparr7 Grand Master

Cdparr7

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, FuFuLamePoo said:

Here’s my thing: if our division weren’t HISTORICALLY bad, would he be getting anywhere close to as much hype for the head coaching job?

So much has been made about how he “rallied the team to get into the playoff picture!” And that’s true! But we were only in said picture because we’re playing in one of the worst divisions in NFL history.

Like, let’s say one of our division counterparts coasted to the division crown with an 11-12 win season, meaning we were never in the hunt. Is Wilks still a serious candidate for finishing 5-6 even though we’re never in the playoff picture? 

No he wouldn’t. I really think with our OL and a few pieces we have on Defense any coach with a fair amount of NFL experience could have done what Wilks did. 

McAdoo or Tabor may have yielded similar results because Rhule was that horrible and firing him ended the chaos and they were able to be a normal team again. 
 

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cdparr7 Grand Master

Cdparr7

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

I like Ellis but his Wilks parading has been beyond annoying. So much so I stopped following his Twitter account. 
Ellis really wants us to go back to a conservative, old fashioned Foxball way of running this team where we make the playoffs, maybe, every 2 or 3 years. 
I want sustainability and coaches like Wilks will NOT give us that. 
 

Yes they will. They will give you 7 wins one season and 11 the next for about 5 years. No more/ no less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigdog10 Experienced

bigdog10

Posted
Posted

How long we gonna sit around here and let Fitts get a pass?

The perceived strength we had at corner going into the season was nothing but a mirage. 
 

The lack of defensive end depth was no mirage. That was evident in august, yet here we sit with projects like YGM, Haynes, Barno, etc. 

  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cdparr7 Grand Master

Cdparr7

Posted
Posted
Just now, bigdog10 said:

How long we gonna sit around here and let Fitts get a pass?

The perceived strength we had at corner going into the season was nothing but a mirage. 
 

The lack of defensive end depth was no mirage. That was evident in august, yet here we sit with projects like YGM, Haynes, Barno, etc. 

I’ve been saying since Rhule got fired, he needs to be out on his ass too.

Henderson trade, Darnold trade, Mayfield trade/release, Jackson extension, Thomas extension, YGM, Nixon, Fletcher, Erving, Elflein, Anderson extension, trading away Perryman, Signing a Punter that don’t kick field goals last year. 

And all of this was Matt Rhule? Fitterer had no say on the matter?

  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cdparr7 Grand Master

Cdparr7

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Cdparr7 said:

I’ve been saying since Rhule got fired, he needs to be out on his ass too.

Henderson trade, Darnold trade, Mayfield trade/release, Jackson extension, Thomas extension, YGM, Nixon, Fletcher, Erving, Elflein, Anderson extension, trading away Perryman, Signing a Punter that don’t kick field goals last year. 

And all of this was Matt Rhule? Fitterer had no say on the matter?

Let’s not forget that despite going 0-3 on QB trades he was in on the deals for Stafford, Wilson, and Watson.

Watson- Not so impressive since return

Stafford-SB, then bad, now hurt.

Wilson- You already know.

  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl Spackler Grand Master

Carl Spackler

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, TLGPanthersFan said:

I like Ellis but his Wilks parading has been beyond annoying. So much so I stopped following his Twitter account. 
Ellis really wants us to go back to a conservative, old fashioned Foxball way of running this team where we make the playoffs, maybe, every 2 or 3 years. 
I want sustainability and coaches like Wilks will NOT give us that. 
 

I'd rather go to the playoffs once every 3 years than once every 20 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CPantherKing Grand Master

CPantherKing

Posted
Posted

Steve Wilks hire was Tepper's backup plan. Tepper wanted NFL HC experience on the team in the offseason. Rhule got to choose 1 and Tepper got to choose 1. Rhule chose to work with McAdoo. Tepper chose to bring in Wilks.

Wilks was brought here because Tepper already knew who he wanted as interim HC if Rhule did not get control of the team. He also knew Wilks and Holcomb on staff would be leverage to land Byron Leftwich as HC in 2023. Wilks was never a Rhule hire. He was there as a backup plan to Rhule and Snow. Wilks was a transition to ready the ship for Leftwich and already have a head start going in to the offseason.

The move to bring Holcomb on with Wilks should have told you everything about Tepper's 2023 HC play. Wilks will still be a Panthers in 2023.

  • Poo 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
41 minutes ago, bigdog10 said:

How long we gonna sit around here and let Fitts get a pass?

The perceived strength we had at corner going into the season was nothing but a mirage. 

Our top two corners are hurt.

Just how deep do you think the average NFL team is at that, or any position?

23 minutes ago, Cdparr7 said:

Let’s not forget that despite going 0-3 on QB trades he was in on the deals for Stafford, Wilson, and Watson.

Watson- Not so impressive since return

Stafford-SB, then bad, now hurt.

Wilson- You already know.

Watson was generally accepted to be largely driven by Tepper.

As to Wilson, there's no indication we were "in on a deal" for him, or did anything more than just make a phone call or two to check

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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...