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!

     

Panthers putting down a grass field?


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

With Messi coming to MLS they need to just make the switch permanent. Doing it for the occasional friendly match was bad enough, rolling out the grass whenever Miami comes to town would be a straight slap in the face to the Panthers players who have asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2023 at 1:13 AM, Donald LaFell said:

I love how they put grass down for the traveling soccer teams each time. It’s so deflating knowing that Tepper ultimately values flexibility for his entertainment biz vs winning or player safety. 
 

 

Its almost as if you don't know how business works! He didn't buy the team to make fans happy, he bought it to make HIMSELF money! He is doing that. 

 

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

12 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

The only problem I see is that dome teams cannot have grass fields.  Do you force them to build new stadiums? Good luck with that.

You’d just grandfather them in until they build their next one.  You don’t have to push an owner very hard to build a new stadium.  It seems like that’s all they ever want to do.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mega Pint of Wine said:

Its almost as if you don't know how business works! He didn't buy the team to make fans happy, he bought it to make HIMSELF money! He is doing that. 

 

What’s disappointing is these franchises print money no matter what unless the entire NFL goes in decline. JR made asinine decisions about costs(indoor practice facility). But at least he prioritized the football team for the stadium. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 6/27/2023 at 12:52 PM, frankw said:

Tepper is worth 18.5 billion I'm sure he can figure out how to keep real grass and still keep the lights on.

I'm sure this has already been suggested, but outside of the cost to re-do the field back to natural grass, could we not put a turf surface down for bigger events over the grass?

If Tepper's concern was destroying the field for the quantity of live events, couldn't they do the reverse of what they're doing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2023 at 7:30 AM, MechaZain said:

With Messi coming to MLS they need to just make the switch permanent. Doing it for the occasional friendly match was bad enough, rolling out the grass whenever Miami comes to town would be a straight slap in the face to the Panthers players who have asked.

They aren't putting in grass for Messi games. That was just speculation.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wcnc.com/amp/article/sports/soccer/charlotte-fc/charlotte-fc-will-not-change-turf-to-grass-for-match-against-lionel-messi-inter-miami-north-carolina-bank-of-america-stadium/275-2159ae32-4ab7-4412-94cd-477763329eec

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, csx said:

Didn't Messi say he is going to sit out games that are played on turf? Pretty sure ticket sales from that game alone would be enough to pay for permanent grass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NYPantherFan said:

Didn't Messi say he is going to sit out games that are played on turf? Pretty sure ticket sales from that game alone would be enough to pay for permanent grass.

Good. We want to win those games not help the opponent 

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...