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!

     

Hot Take? That Was A Positive Game For Us


tukafan21
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, MillionDollarCam said:

The loser mentality and Stockholm Syndrome needs to stop.

At this rate some of the posters here are going to be dead and gone before the Panthers make the playoffs again.

All that matters is winning and the Panthers don’t win.

Brother I've lived through a decade of poo Canes hockey and some poo awful years with the Panthers since 96. 

But I'm this goddamn close to throwing in the towel on the Panthers fandom. It's that level of bad for me. Maybe it's just an accumulation that's hit a tipping point for me but like you said, it's about winning. I'll take moral victories but we aren't even achieving that much.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NAS said:

Can we put this into perspective? They played against one of the worst pass defenses in the NFL that plays a lot of zone and not man to man. That’s why you saw more open receivers. You don’t think Bryce would have hit most of them?

Ummm.... Have you seen Bryce the first two games??? Absolutely not

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lightsout said:

Brother I've lived through a decade of poo Canes hockey and some poo awful years with the Panthers since 96. 

But I'm this goddamn close to throwing in the towel on the Panthers fandom. It's that level of bad for me. Maybe it's just an accumulation that's hit a tipping point for me but like you said, it's about winning. I'll take moral victories but we aren't even achieving that much.

Moral victories are why we ended up losing out on Justin Herbert as a QB. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

I'm kinda surprised to see everyone losing it right now, especially given how down on the team I was after last week.  But I think this game was a huge step forward for us compared to how bad we looked in the first two games.

If we didn't look so bad the first two games, I don't think people would be all that upset right now.  Seattle in the rain is about the hardest place to play in this league and sure, not everything was great, but we still put up 27 points on them and our defense kept them in check for most of the game.  It's not surprising that a playoff team from last year with a HOF coach was able to wear us down and figure out how to put up points in the second half, this was always an expected loss coming into the season.

The false start penalties are absolutely frustrating, but in that environment and the way many of them happened, it was clear that it was communication problems and not just bad mental errors, they'll work on it and I'm not concerned moving forward.

The most concerning thing to me was how much better the offense looked with Dalton in there than Bryce, especially with him losing Mingo as well.  He just looked "NFL competent" out there, something Bryce didn't and scares me moving forward with him, but that's not the point of this thread.

The other thing that has me worried is health though, our guys are dropping like flies out there, not good.

Loser mindset

 

Stop making excuses. We flat out suck. 

 

#TheTepperWay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Castavar said:

Apparently, a positive game for us is losing by 10 and commiting 8th false start penalties lol

Meanwhile, a Doubs lead Cardinals team can stomp the Cowboys and the Colts with a backup QB can beat the Ravens.

Minshew should have been our bridge QB years ago. Surprised he’s not been a full-time starter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SmokinwithWilly said:

Moral victories are why we ended up losing out on Justin Herbert as a QB. 

 

True but as a fan, I'd be totally down with losing that game in a shootout. Thought we were for a bit there, then realized after the missed FG that we were absolutely fuged. At least with a shootout it's like "hey, we battled and came up short. We can build on this"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lightsout said:

 

True but as a fan, I'd be totally down with losing that game in a shootout. Thought we were for a bit there, then realized after the missed FG that we were absolutely fuged. At least with a shootout it's like "hey, we battled and came up short. We can build on this"

 

I still believe Rivera tried to tank that game. There's no way to explain starting Haskins and playing him an entire half with how he was playing, then cutting him. 

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

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • 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
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...