From Snow to Wilks

[LinvilleGorge]

35 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Defense played about the same overall, Highs were still high but the lows were waaaaaaaaaaay lower with Holcomb than with Snow. It was the inconsistency that was baffling. One week they look great, the next week they let Joe Mixon score 5 TDs.

This. Joe Mixon and Mike Evans had not just career games against our D post-Snow they had all-time great games.

[Tr3ach]

5 minutes ago, stbugs said:

What’s funny about the three long and east Evans TDs is they didn’t count in the graphic above.

Why does the stat posted above (I pasted below) matter? So the long deep TD passes on the side just don’t count? Gotta love the weird snippets acting like the Panthers were the top D in the league. I guess Joe Mixon’s TDs and yards don’t count either.

The #Panthers defense allowed the fewest yards per attempt in the league on middle of the field passes.

Yea hes really cherry picking to make his argument and making a lot of excuses.   The defense regressed.  Its ok to admit that.  It doesnt nesscesarily mean Wilks was a bad coach.

[Mage]

Watching the two defenses play, I felt like they looked better under Phil Snow. Maybe I'm wrong but that is just how viewed it.  I think the defense under Wilks benefited from the offense self-destructing less.  But I preferred how aggressive Snow's defense was.

[Khyber53]

23 minutes ago, rebelrouser said:

You mean how bad it SHOULD have gotten. Wilks screwed us in the draft with his mediocrity. 

Oh not that old thing again. Bad teams pick high in the draft. Again and again. Their fanbases live for it, drool over it, hope and pray for it. And they get them again and again.

Let's move on.

 

[Mr. Scot]

35 minutes ago, Kentucky Panther said:

Mike Evans and Tom Brady on the verge of retirement killed us in the biggest game of the season. Before that, it was Mitch fugging Trubisky. We saw enough of Wilks defense to know we didn’t want him 

One thing has become abundantly clear from reading the articles about the coaching search: That Tampa game may not have killed his chances of getting the head coaching job, but it sure as hell damaged them... significantly.

Edited February 7, 2023 by Mr. Scot

[t96]

53 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Truth be told, I think Wilks gameday skill set is actually better suited for a head coaching position than a defensive coordinator.

Unfortunately, one of the things that makes or breaks a head coach is smart staffing.

I don't think he's got it in that area.

Yeah I wouldn't disagree with that, that's where being an assistant HC makes the most sense to me, as a HC can offload/delegate some of the gameday stuff to Wilks

[Jon Snow]

He didn't get the job. It's time to move on.

[top dawg]

The epitome of cherry picking: Throw out certain passes, and throw out a couple of games, then make it look all nice and proclaim what's akin to a lie. Way to go!

[Castavar]

First we let Mariota put up fuggin 37 points with 3 TDs (his best game of the year) and lost. Then we let Mixon score 5 damn TDs against us. Then we let a Trubisky lead offense come into our house and slam it down our throats. And to finish it off, we let Mike Evans get behind not once, not twice, but THREE times and never bothered to double him. I'm so glad Tepper stood his ground and didn't cave into the pressure to hire Wilks. I've seen enough of that sh*t.

[Davidson Deac II]

For me, it was the Pittsburgh game that did Wilkes in.  We were in a position to be in the drivers seat for the NFC south, but Pitt came in and dominated us on both lines of scrimmage, even though they had a back up qb.  They just ran it down our throats, and we couldn't stop the pass either.    Atlanta did a better job defensively against them than we did.  

[JawnyBlaze]

I’d have to disagree. We never in three years (to my recollection) got embarrassed like we did THRICE under Wilks: Bengals, Steelers, Bucs the second time.  Stats can be manipulated to push whatever narrative you want, but the stench of those three games was undeniable. 

[trueblade]

2 hours ago, Khyber53 said:

Considering the firing of the HC in a busted season, perhaps we should judge his impact based on how bad it COULD have gotten. Interim coaches and low player effort go hand in hand.

It's basically impossible to quantify what could have happened or might have happened. There's no basis for comparison. You can only go on what did happen.

[stratocatter]

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

One thing has become abundantly clear from reading the articles about the coaching search: That Tampa game may not have killed his chances of getting the head coaching job, but it sure as hell damaged them... significantly.

I couldn't argue real hard otherwise. That was bad. I didn't feel the need to go on 4th like people wanted, that can be defended. But blowing a lead like that, and just giving it to them so easily after it already happened once, you can't defend anything about that.

I don't expect perfection from humans I just expect them to learn. And even with the other bombs I still think he earned the job and would have fixed some mistakes ands made new one. I  was really impressed with him. I do understand why Reich, and of the offensive others, I was probably best with him. 

Edited February 7, 2023 by stratocatter

[frankw]

"Well you see if you remove three of the most important games of the season which were losses and ended our postseason hopes things actually weren't that bad."