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!

     

Carolina Panthers a Wild Card Team?


chknwing
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

Why are people so butthurt? He’s saying bet the over at 4.5 wins. Not like he’s saying bet the over at 8 or 9 wins. And he’s not the first person I’ve seen make the Jaguars comparison. Trevor Lawrence’s rookie season numbers with a complete train wreck around him were just as terrible as Bryce’s. It’s not really that crazy.

Nobody is butthurt and it's 5.5 and he is saying panthers are going to win 8 or 9 which is pretty wild all things considered.  He is just leaning into his hot take and making the radio/podcast rounds.   

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean I think the best case scenario has to hit for the Panthers and everyone else in the NFCS has to hit their worst case scenario. 

Personally, I think this is the year that NO finally collapses and I think they finish 4th in the division regardless. 

ATL is overrated but still likely a 6-9 win team.

TB plays tough football, their defense will be there but their success depends on the offense, they too are a 6-9 win team. 

The Panthers are probably 4-6 wins at best. If they find some sort of momentum during the season and get 7-8 wins, and TB and ATL struggle then maybe but I find it very unlikely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just a talking head.  Talking about gambling. If anybody takes the under on 4.5 wins, they're most likely losing their money.  

So he's only saying if you want to bet on a possible sleeper, take the over.  It's not rocket science. 

Pathetic that so many on the huddle have reduced themselves to posting purely trash every time they hit the submit button.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why they play the games.  I think they win 5 or 6.  Remember, the 99 Rams went from 4 wins in 1998 to 16 wins in 1999 with a former grocery store clerk at QB.  There were many experts who were mocking Dick Vermeil before the 99 season.  It is unlikely, but if our Defense can get pressure and stay healthy, the offense could figure it out.  I am not predicting this, but I am not burying the Panthers in June either.

 

 

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a team that will struggle to get to 5 wins and avoid being the worst team in the NFCS. This guy is obviously working for the house as a 'gambling specialist' because all that money will end up in their hands if you follow his advice. Calling all suckers. It's not even a football take but a betting take lol. And the Jets are favored to win in 14 games after Rodgers couldn't finish 1 offensive series last year LOL. If you are not making fun of this than you missed the point. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, MHS831 said:

That's why they play the games.  I think they win 5 or 6.  Remember, the 99 Rams went from 4 wins in 1998 to 16 wins in 1999 with a former grocery store clerk at QB.  There were many experts who were mocking Dick Vermeil before the 99 season.  It is unlikely, but if our Defense can get pressure and stay healthy, the offense could figure it out.  I am not predicting this, but I am not burying the Panthers in June either.

Same. we think we know, but until the games are being played, we don't know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have known for years and we know this year. The big question is will it be pick #1 again or pick #10.

The last time I didn't know was 2019 and how one-sided that D was. Cam went down and then it became known. Since then nothing has really changed just a revolving door of failures and mismatched personel and schemes.

  • Pie 2
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

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...