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

parker Rising Star

parker

Posted
Posted

I'm not going to say yes or no.  It depends on who else is out there.  I am not as hard on Wilkes as most people. He had little to no say in the roster and coordinators.  He also started with a 1-5 record.  He came in and made the Panthers competitive for the remainder of the year.  Darnold looked somewhat decent for the first time in a long time.

I said earlier in the week that Brady vs our defense without Horn scared me a bit.  That and some critical turnovers cost us the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Waldo Grand Master

Waldo

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Speaking of Ellis...

My understanding is that he's directing this at people who have communicated with him on Twitter. I can't say I've seen anyone show more vitriol toward Wilks than Rhule.

To anyone who would do that though, I'd call you an absolute moron.

Considering what is going on with Twitterverse that really isn't surprising.

It's not the case here. I have seen more 'stop comparing Wilks to Rhule' and I'm not sure I have seen 1 'Rhule was a better coach' takes here lol.

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

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Proportion matters?   What does that mean

Rhule's contract, situation and length of employment vs Wilks...

38 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Considering what is going on with Twitterverse that really isn't surprising.

It's not the case here. I have seen more 'stop comparing Wilks to Rhule' and I'm not sure I have seen 1 'Rhule was a better coach' takes here lol.

Probably helps that some of our more persistent nitwits got banned over the course of the season.

(including one particularly dim bulb yesterday)

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kentucky Panther Mentor

Kentucky Panther

Posted
Posted

This board would have killed Rhule for losses like Wilks took against the Bengals, Steelers, and now Bucs. I don’t want to hear any of this “he did well with what he had” when the reality is his coaching has been suspect from the very beginning. 
 

Thankfully at this point it looks like most of the board recognizes this. Some of you still need to wake up and realize what mediocrity looks like. And how we will continue to show that if we make the decision to keep Wilks. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Kentucky Panther said:

This board would have killed Rhule for losses like Wilks took against the Bengals, Steelers, and now Bucs. 

And he'd have deserved it.

Wilks may not be "the guy" but he's worlds better than Matt Rhule if for no other reason than that he's actually qualified to be an NFL coach.

Matt Rhule never reached that standard and likely never will.

  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kentucky Panther Mentor

Kentucky Panther

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

And he'd have deserved it.

Wilks may not be "the guy" but he's worlds better than Matt Rhule if for no other reason than that he's actually qualified to be an NFL coach.

Matt Rhule never reached that standard and likely never will.

He’s better than Rhule but my god that standard is about as low as you can go. The Panthers have to think they can do better than that. Have to. 

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Kentucky Panther said:

He’s better than Rhule but my god that standard is about as low as you can go. The Panthers have to think they can do better than that. Have to. 

I'd say "better than" is a huge understatement. Rhule was absolute dog sh-t.

I don't think Wilks gets the job, and I'm okay with that, but he at least deserves respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
45catfan Grand Master

45catfan

Posted
Posted

Wilks is great motivator and leader.  What he is not is a great head coach. Just because he could earn the respect of the locker room quickly and get guys to buy into his philosophy doesn't mean he's an excellent Xs and Os guy or game day manager.  He's better than Rhule by a mile, but that's not  a ringing endorsement because Rhule was utter garbage. 

  • Beer 1
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...