Reich interview w/ Balboni

[X-Clown]

1 hour ago, panthers55 said:

And we don't expect Reich to do as well as San Fran. But we should have a better qb than Purdy who was a 7th rounder which means we don't need pro bowlers to succeed. Again we went 6-6 and was a missed field goal from 7-5. Now all of a sudden we don't have talent and have all these holes. Talk about settling for mediocre. Reich is fine if we regress from 500 but who would be giving Wilks the same grace. i can't believe people can't see the hypocrisy. 

By your logic we should have won more because Wilks had 2 top 3 picks at QB with 10 combined years of experience at his disposal and Reich will not.

Edited January 27, 2023 by X-Clown

[rippadonn]

1 hour ago, thennek said:

Does anyone even have a health update on Corral?  His injury seemed pretty serious.  Was wondering if he will even be healthy enough to play.....

https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/football/news/panthers-matt-corral-recovery-making-progress/

[CPantherKing]

Drafting a 1st round QB may bring hope for the fan base (the mythical 1st round savior), but remember that drafting a 1st round QB in the top of the 1st round is the end for that coach. Since 1990 and the start of modern free agency in the early 90s, only 1 QB has led the team and coach that got him in the draft to a SB championship - Eli Manning. 63 QBs have been drafted in the top 15 picks. Mahomes and Roethlisberger were 2 successful QBs that won the SB in 1/2 seasons, but they were dropped into a team that was already established to contend with their coach.

Free agent signing or drafting a QB later in the draft is the best way to go for a new HC. Trading for a QB is just as risky as drafting a 1st round QB. Inheriting a starting QB by a new HC has also been successful for a few coaches, but this can take a decade to accomplish after replacing the coach that drafted and developed that 1st round QB.

Stay away from a 1st round QB unless his last name is Manning. I would like Reich to succeed and not have to wait for the next HC to win a SB with Reich's 1st round QB.

[panthers55]

1 hour ago, X-Clown said:

By your logic we should have won more because Wilks had 2 top 3 picks at QB with 10 combined years of experience at his disposal and Reich will not.

Baker was pretty much gone and Darnold was hurt for the first six games that Wilkes coached so your logic from the get go is faulty. Once Darnold went in we were 4-2.

[X-Clown]

4 hours ago, panthers55 said:

Baker was pretty much gone and Darnold was hurt for the first six games that Wilkes coached so your logic from the get go is faulty. Once Darnold went in we were 4-2.

Baker was only inactive for wilks first 2 games….and was on the team for 4 more weeks after that (including getting to play the second half of the Cincy game). Being available for 1/3 of the games is different than being “pretty much gone”. 

[TheMaulClaw]

19 hours ago, 4Corners said:

Wow. I’ve seen harder softballs in a senior slow pitch league. 

Careful the poobirds are out.  Anything skeptical and not in line with the meta will be shat upon.  Even just a joke.

Edited January 28, 2023 by TheMaulClaw

[TheMaulClaw]

12 hours ago, CPantherKing said:

Drafting a 1st round QB may bring hope for the fan base (the mythical 1st round savior), but remember that drafting a 1st round QB in the top of the 1st round is the end for that coach. Since 1990 and the start of modern free agency in the early 90s, only 1 QB has led the team and coach that got him in the draft to a SB championship - Eli Manning. 63 QBs have been drafted in the top 15 picks. Mahomes and Roethlisberger were 2 successful QBs that won the SB in 1/2 seasons, but they were dropped into a team that was already established to contend with their coach.

Free agent signing or drafting a QB later in the draft is the best way to go for a new HC. Trading for a QB is just as risky as drafting a 1st round QB. Inheriting a starting QB by a new HC has also been successful for a few coaches, but this can take a decade to accomplish after replacing the coach that drafted and developed that 1st round QB.

Stay away from a 1st round QB unless his last name is Manning. I would like Reich to succeed and not have to wait for the next HC to win a SB with Reich's 1st round QB.

I mean we had a pretty good experience with Cam.

[panthers55]

16 hours ago, CRA said:

Again, we went .500 with one of the weakest schedules in the league.   If it wasn’t so weak, Wilks doesn’t go .500 most likely with the talent we had.   Because we had holes that weren’t as glaring vs the weak opponents. 

you can’t ignore who Wilks could and couldn’t beat.   And what we could and couldn’t do based on opponent.  

my issue is simply claiming a HC should win next year.   If we have a tough schedule, this roster has too many holes IMO.  For Wilks or Frank to be expected to win and rioting if we don’t? I would expect either to compete to be around .500 next year.  Give or take.  That’s not how I define winning though.  

Roster isn’t build to actually compete yet to do something that matters.  Frank isn’t inheriting that type roster.  Guess we will see what they do in the off-season to change that 

And you act as if 2023 in the NFC South won't be another down year. Truth is that it is 6 games against teams in the division we will be favored in.  Add in Indy, Seattle,  houston, and Chicago. That is 10 games against teams likely to have losing seasons. Tell me again how it would be fine if we go below 500 with this schedule. That doesn't include what would happen to Green Bay without Rodgers or Tennessee if they struggle. No it looks with the exception of a few games our schedule next year may be wesker than this year. So this idea that 2022 was easy  may be true but we should have another easy schedule next year. So what is the excuse if we don't go better than 500 in 2023. That would be a setback given the likely  weak schedule and the opportunity to fill some of these glaring holes and in light of how we finished this year on a 4-2 run.

Edited January 28, 2023 by panthers55

[panthers55]

9 hours ago, X-Clown said:

Baker was only inactive for wilks first 2 games….and was on the team for 4 more weeks after that (including getting to play the second half of the Cincy game). Being available for 1/3 of the games is different than being “pretty much gone”. 

Not really different as all.  Baker was the reason we started so slow and the way he played it was pretty much terrible. We would have better off if he didnt play at all. How many games did we win with Baker?  And did we hang onto him because he was starter material or we had no one else due to injuries. Again he was pretty much gone and useless.

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by panthers55

[trueblade]

9 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

And you act as if 2023 in the NFC South won't be another down year. Truth is that it is 6 games against teams in the division we will be favored in.  Add in Indy, Seattle,  houston, and Chicago. That is 10 games against teams likely to have losing seasons. Tell me again how it would be fine if we go below 500 with this schedule. That doesn't include what would happen to Green Bay without Rodgers or Tennessee if they struggle. No it looks with the exception of a few games our schedule next year may be wesker than this year. So this idea that 2022 was easy  may be true but we should have another easy schedule next year. So what is the excuse if we don't go better than 500 in 2023. That would be a setback given the likely  weak schedule and the opportunity to fill some of these glaring holes and in light of how we finished this year on a 4-2 run.

Historical data indicates we should expect the 2023 NFC South Champion to have at least 10 wins. 

Every previous time a division has been won by a sub-.500 team (and TB finished 8-9), the following season the division winner had at least 10 wins. Granted the sample size is small and negative regression is still a possibility.

Example: Here's the last three years of NFC East champions: 

2020 - 7-9 

2021 - 12-4 

2022 - 14-2

[trueblade]

12 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

And you act as if 2023 in the NFC South won't be another down year. Truth is that it is 6 games against teams in the division we will be favored in.  Add in Indy, Seattle,  houston, and Chicago. That is 10 games against teams likely to have losing seasons. Tell me again how it would be fine if we go below 500 with this schedule. That doesn't include what would happen to Green Bay without Rodgers or Tennessee if they struggle.

I'd question including Seattle with Indy, Houston and Chicago. Seattle was a decent to average team in 2022. I wouldn't bet on Pete Carroll having a losing record.

I always go into the season assuming we'll split the division games. Those are always tough since the teams knew each other, though we will have the advantage of being the only team in the NFC South with a new coaching staff.

[panthers55]

18 minutes ago, trueblade said:

I'd question including Seattle with Indy, Houston and Chicago. Seattle was a decent to average team in 2022. I wouldn't bet on Pete Carroll having a losing record.

I always go into the season assuming we'll split the division games. Those are always tough since the teams knew each other, though we will have the advantage of being the only team in the NFC South with a new coaching staff.

We beat Seattle on the road and won 4 of 6 in our division this year and was a missed field goal from going 5-1. Tell me again why we we will not win the division which guarantees a home playoff game. And none of the other  teams I mentioned had a winning record in 2022.  All these excuses for why we won't win in 2023. I can't imagine if we went even  7-10 again under Wilks everyone would be giving Wilks the same pass that Reich seems to get.

Edited January 28, 2023 by panthers55

[X-Clown]

17 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

Not really different as all.  Baker was the reason we started so slow and the way he played it was pretty much terrible. We would have better off if he didnt play at all. How many games did we win with Baker?  And did we hang onto him because he was starter material or we had no one else due to injuries. Again he was pretty much gone and useless.

 

Your criteria suggests that Matt Corral is a better QB than Brock Purdy because he was drafted higher, I guess it doesn’t matter that he’s never taken a regular season snap.  Keeping with that line of thinking there’s no way we should have lost that last game against Tampa since we had #3 pick Sam Darnold facing off against some old guy who was picked in the 6th round. Guess we lost against the Steelers since they started a #2 pick and we only started a #3 pick….if only we had started our #1 pick we would have won.

[panthers55]

13 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

Your criteria suggests that Matt Corral is a better QB than Brock Purdy because he was drafted higher, I guess it doesn’t matter that he’s never taken a regular season snap.  Keeping with that line of thinking there’s no way we should have lost that last game against Tampa since we had #3 pick Sam Darnold facing off against some old guy who was picked in the 6th round. Guess we lost against the Steelers since they started a #2 pick and we only started a #3 pick….if only we had started our #1 pick we would have won.

Aren't we constantly being told that draft position makes all the difference and you can't find a QB late in the draft?  How many snaps did Purdy take in the regular season before he started.  You seem to have taken the illogical to another level. And you missed the whole point which is that a good scheme can make even a marginal QB look much better than they would be just based on draft position. And if we get one of the top qbs in the league, then if Reich is as good as advertised then he should have them playing at a high level much like Purdy.

Edited January 28, 2023 by panthers55