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!

     

I hope Morgan is the Answer...


Johnstonny
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, BrianS said:

I think "hope" is a more accurate way to state this.  We have no basis to think he was a dissenting voice, but we can hope that he was.  That pretty much sums up Dan Morgan for better or worse: Hope.

Yes it's speculation but despite the well deserved hate I'm working with the theory that Tepper isn't abjectly stupid.  This would require Morgan having been more right than wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

 

Ditto. I didn’t like the hire because he’s been Fitterer’s right hand man through some horrible decisions. I was hoping for someone who’s been involved in several solid drafts.

Hopefully, he proves us wrong but there was literally nothing you can look at in his assistant GM role here that gives you hope.

Here is my positive spin.  A while back, I was an assistant principal.  I was an extension of the principal, even though I shared my contrarian views frequently.  I was rarely heard, and the principal expected me to enforce her decisions.  I did.  When she was demoted, the interview committee basically held it against me that I worked under her.  I remember saying, "I learned a lot from her about how a principal allows their egos to take over, how they become blinded by politics, and how they should listen to their subordinates with more purpose.  If you think success is the only teacher or that I will pattern my leadership after a model I know to be broken, then you need to start asking me specific questions about what advice I provided that was not accepted.  I was never insubordinate, however, and it seems that you expected me to be so."   They did not offer me the job, but it did reveal their bias.  I wonder if Morgan faced the same obstacles--with Tepper getting involved, Fitterer would listen to his boss and not his apprentice. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Here is my positive spin.  A while back, I was an assistant principal.  I was an extension of the principal, even though I shared my contrarian views frequently.  I was rarely heard, and the principal expected me to enforce her decisions.  I did.  When she was demoted, the interview committee basically held it against me that I worked under her.  I remember saying, "I learned a lot from her about how a principal allows their egos to take over, how they become blinded by politics, and how they should listen to their subordinates with more purpose.  If you think success is the only teacher or that I will pattern my leadership after a model I know to be broken, then you need to start asking me specific questions about what advice I provided that was not accepted.  I was never insubordinate, however, and it seems that you expected me to be so."   They did not offer me the job, but it did reveal their bias.  I wonder if Morgan faced the same obstacles--with Tepper getting involved, Fitterer would listen to his boss and not his apprentice. 

We’ll find out but the negative spin is that Morgan was installed to placate fans as a former beloved Panther and to ensure Young would get more time like Fitt and Tepper wanted. Kind of like we’ll continue the plan but Fitt has to take one for the team.

Funny because it doesn’t matter which is true, as long we can draft well. Heck, it doesn’t matter if Morgan was overruled by bad Fitt if we can’t draft well. This isn’t the Bad News Bears movie. If we don’t improve the talent by a lot, we aren’t magically winning anything regardless if Morgan wanted Stroud, Tank Dell and was all for trading Burns to the Rams.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WhoKnows said:

We’ll find out but the negative spin is that Morgan was installed to placate fans as a former beloved Panther and to ensure Young would get more time like Fitt and Tepper wanted. Kind of like we’ll continue the plan but Fitt has to take one for the team.

Funny because it doesn’t matter which is true, as long we can draft well. Heck, it doesn’t matter if Morgan was overruled by bad Fitt if we can’t draft well. This isn’t the Bad News Bears movie. If we don’t improve the talent by a lot, we aren’t magically winning anything regardless if Morgan wanted Stroud, Tank Dell and was all for trading Burns to the Rams.

We are at rock bottom talent wise... only direction is up. He can't possibly fix it 2 years... I figure if he stands up to Dipper he'll be gone in a year and a half and we'll still be stuck with the same problem. Morgan has been around the block and knows football. We can only wait and see how he does.... but if Dipper is leaning on him we'll know because we've experienced his BS for 6 long hard incompetent years.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do too. I was rather underwhelmed by the hire. I'm not reading much into anything Dan or Dave Canales are saying at the combine or the upcoming draft at this point. Been there done that buying into fluff and hype. The Panthers social media has bamboozled us time and time again. Talk is cheap. I'm all about that action. Show me results.

spacer.png

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, frankw said:

I do too. I was rather underwhelmed by the hire. I'm not reading much into anything Dan or Dave Canales are saying at the combine or the upcoming draft at this point. Been there done that buying into fluff and hype. The Panthers social media has bamboozled us time and time again. Talk is cheap. I'm all about that action. Show me results.

spacer.png

Yup... been having the Mary Poppins attitude for the last 6 years... Sht don't start happinin ima act a hard fool... more than usual.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan Morgan is one of the best LBs to play for the Panthers. With our history at that position, that’s high praise. He was a DUDE. 

I believe in his talent evaluation skills. He knows what good football players are supposed to look like. I don’t see him falling for empty hype. 

I’m in just straight ‘what is there to lose’ mode. I hope he’ll be good at backing Tepper off. It’s his only hope. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Gapanthersfan said:

Dan Morgan is one of the best LBs to play for the Panthers. With our history at that position, that’s high praise. He was a DUDE. 

I believe in his talent evaluation skills. He knows what good football players are supposed to look like. I don’t see him falling for empty hype. 

I’m in just straight ‘what is there to lose’ mode. I hope he’ll be good at backing Tepper off. It’s his only hope. 

What do you believe in? What examples of his player evaluations are awesome? He’s been with the Panthers since 2021 and nothing good has happened draft, trade or FA wise. I don’t care at all that he was a good LB here. I have seen any NFL teams lining up to have Kuechly or TD as their GM.

I’ll hope for the best, but there is nothing in the past three years that points to Morgan being a good talent evaluator.

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

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...