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!

     

Notebook: Dave Canales "open" to playing starters Saturday


Carolina Panthers
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Wouldn't this be the whole getting reps and getting comfortable in the offense argument?

Na that's what the first two games are for.  There's almost no reason to play our starters against the Bills backups.  Best case scenario is they look good against 2nd stringers, which does nothing.  Worst case is they get stuffed by 2nd stringers and lose confidence.  Also, the risk of nagging injuries in the last game can easily drag into week 1.  If there was a time to play the starters, this ain't it.  Just my two cents.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Na that's what the first two games are for.  There's almost no reason to play our starters against the Bills backups.  Best case scenario is they look good against 2nd stringers, which does nothing.  Worst case is they get stuffed by 2nd stringers and lose confidence.  Also, the risk of nagging injuries in the last game can easily drag into week 1.  If there was a time to play the starters, this ain't it.  Just my two cents.

It just shows there are so many different ways to do this. Last week would have been against the Jets backups as they didn’t play starters either. The Patriots starters barely played week 1 also. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

It just shows there are so many different ways to do this. Last week would have been against the Jets backups as they didn’t play starters either. The Patriots starters barely played week 1 also. 

True.  But we have no way of knowing why they chose to do that.  I would question playing starters if I was playing against the Panthers and they weren't playing anyone that was gonna make the 53.  Just throwing out there.

If they haven't had action in the first two games, I just don't think it makes a lot of sense to dress them for game 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Na that's what the first two games are for.  There's almost no reason to play our starters against the Bills backups.  Best case scenario is they look good against 2nd stringers, which does nothing.  Worst case is they get stuffed by 2nd stringers and lose confidence.  Also, the risk of nagging injuries in the last game can easily drag into week 1.  If there was a time to play the starters, this ain't it.  Just my two cents.

Had the starters played against the Jets, it would have been against the Jets backups.  

I agree with you about the injury thing though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

True.  But we have no way of knowing why they chose to do that.  I would question playing starters if I was playing against the Panthers and they weren't playing anyone that was gonna make the 53.  Just throwing out there.

If they haven't had action in the first two games, I just don't think it makes a lot of sense to dress them for game 3.

I get it.  It's why I'm on the boat of it doesn't matter.  Play them and get the ready, sounds good.  Keep them healthy and work on depth, go for it.  

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

I get it.  It's why I'm on the boat of it doesn't matter.  Play them and get the ready, sounds good.  Keep them healthy and work on depth, go for it.  

I kind of don’t care anymore either. The hopeful side says I want to see what they have done.

The 2023 me might say 17 will be more than enough. I’m watching replays the last two years as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

Wouldn't this be the whole getting reps and getting comfortable in the offense argument?

No. If injuries are something you are trying to avoid or lessen the impact (on the regular season), you don’t use only the last preseason game to get reps.

First, when other teams play their starters, they do it in weeks 1 and 2 so better chance of real reps. Second, if someone rolls an ankle, when do you want that to happen? Preseason weeks 1 and 2 give you more recovery time than week 3.

In days gone by, no starters ever played the last week of preseason. I’m all for reps when we have brand new OLs and coaches every single year, but the smart choice is to play starters early when they have a higher chance to play other starters and have more chance to heal if there’s any minor injuries.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

I get it.  It's why I'm on the boat of it doesn't matter.  Play them and get the ready, sounds good.  Keep them healthy and work on depth, go for it.  

I pledged Canales a benefit of the doubt this year and will start his test year two if he makes it lol. 

If it doesn’t work, we may see a different approach next year. I am like, what do we have to lose? I predicted 6 wins... is 5 or 4 going to make that much of a difference? In draft position yeah but otherwise I care all that much if it is 11 losses or 15 losses. 

I would be happy as a fan if they ramp up their game as the season progresses and are showing us something good by season’s end.

I always say, if they can be good enough to spoil someone’s playoff hopes that is some good progress. 

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

1 hour ago, strato said:

I pledged Canales a benefit of the doubt this year and will start his test year two if he makes it lol. 

If it doesn’t work, we may see a different approach next year. I am like, what do we have to lose? I predicted 6 wins... is 5 or 4 going to make that much of a difference? In draft position yeah but otherwise I care all that much if it is 11 losses or 15 losses. 

I would be happy as a fan if they ramp up their game as the season progresses and are showing us something good by season’s end.

I always say, if they can be good enough to spoil someone’s playoff hopes that is some good progress. 

I'm on the same boat.  Try to put a competitive team on the field and if we get 6 wins with a functioning offense I'll call it a success.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

No. If injuries are something you are trying to avoid or lessen the impact (on the regular season), you don’t use only the last preseason game to get reps.

First, when other teams play their starters, they do it in weeks 1 and 2 so better chance of real reps. Second, if someone rolls an ankle, when do you want that to happen? Preseason weeks 1 and 2 give you more recovery time than week 3.

In days gone by, no starters ever played the last week of preseason. I’m all for reps when we have brand new OLs and coaches every single year, but the smart choice is to play starters early when they have a higher chance to play other starters and have more chance to heal if there’s any minor injuries.

The problem is we didn't have enough starters healthy early on.  Our LG is just getting healthy, Hunt was in and out of joint practice, XL was injured, and Johnson is injured.  It would be our QB behind an incomplete OL without his first round WR and he best WR.  Tremble was also banged up along with out backup tackle and backup QB (imagine if Dalton's injury lingered and Bryce gets hurt.  You want Plummer in the regular season?).  I think this is why he didn't play them early.  He kept saying we see how they are looking health wise before he made a decision.  So he could trot out half an offense or try to make some play through mild injuries that could turn more severe.  

Now if you are wanting reps vs starters that is tough to find.  The Pats played their starters for 1 series and the Jets didn't play them at all.  So that would have been one brief series of a offense missing key pieces going against a Pats defense in week 1. 

Again there are 100s of different factors that go into this, which is why there isn't one specific way to do it. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

The problem is we didn't have enough starters healthy early on.  Our LG is just getting healthy, Hunt was in and out of joint practice, XL was injured, and Johnson is injured.  It would be our QB behind an incomplete OL without his first round WR and he best WR.  Tremble was also banged up along with out backup tackle and backup QB (imagine if Dalton's injury lingered and Bryce gets hurt.  You want Plummer in the regular season?).  I think this is why he didn't play them early.  He kept saying we see how they are looking health wise before he made a decision.  So he could trot out half an offense or try to make some play through mild injuries that could turn more severe.  

Now if you are wanting reps vs starters that is tough to find.  The Pats played their starters for 1 series and the Jets didn't play them at all.  So that would have been one brief series of a offense missing key pieces going against a Pats defense in week 1. 

Again there are 100s of different factors that go into this, which is why there isn't one specific way to do it. 

This all makes sense and I don't disagree with any of it, it's just frustrating that a 2 win team is essentially fronting that we can't use all the reps we can get (esp given new system, new staff, and OL/roster turnover). I have seen enough freak preseason/training camp injuries to know that health is paramount, but I do think young QBs getting reps is important no matter the situation.  I say that to also say I'm not sure how much any rep last year helped Bryce considering we couldn't run for 3 yards, run block, pass block, run a route, catch a ball, or put all of those things together for more than like 15 plays in an entire season so I digress 

Edited by backINblack28
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

    • If you are an athlete or former athlete (myself?  Cornhole 2021-present; Disc Golf 2013-got a mega blister and had to retire; speed walking--every black Friday at Walmart 2003-2009) you know what it is to lose confidence.  Self-inflicted or not (in my view, a lot of 2023 was coaching and a lot of 2024 was confidence), he has confidence now. How fragile is it?  I think the light is on, the game slowed down, and he is ready to do his thing.  He seems to be "mobile in the pocket" instead of "running scared."   Last year, there were times when AT was out, Johnson gone, and all he really had was XL and Coker--a raw rookie with upside and an UDFA rookie.  TE was rarely a viable option. It reminded me of Benjamin and Funchess.   Moore had to step up.  This season, Bryce has weapons.  I expect XL to improve.  I expect TMac to help tremendously, and I think Coker will be solid.  Renfrow?  Horn?  bonuses.    
    • His points are valid.  However, it seems a bit based on past performance and fails to take into consideration trends and conditions that might suggest growth in 2025.   For one, he breaks the team down by position and ranks them separately.  I guess that is a fair way to do it, but they are dependent upon each other. Last year, our DL sucked.  That impacts the rest of the defense.  With no internal pressure, the QBs simply step up to avoid the Edge rush.  I would have suggested that the internal DL is now featuring pass rushers and large people who can collapse the pocket.  Secondly, the LBs were not protected very well in 2024.  It is hard to see the holes and step up when a guard is in your earhole a second after the snap.  Finally, the defensive backs will be forced to make fewer tackles and they will be better in pass protection with a new and improved DL.    Canales made an interesting comment the other day, and I (from the outside looking in) feel the same way:  (paraphrasing) "I have never seen a better group of rookies."   I think the biggest concern is the learning curve.  How long before these rookies are ready?   I am bullish on this team.  I think they win 3 of their first 4 and get confident.  The get the fans behind them.  From there, they win 6 of the remaining 13.  If they stay injury free, they have an outside shot at the NFC south.     
    • Biiiiiig eyeroll on this.  First, Look at historical stats of the most recent historical great DBs.  I plucked 3, Revis, Sherman, and Norman (cuzz he was our guy).  Combined post age 30, there are TWO pro bowls between those 3 and wanna get this...ZERO seasons with 16 games started.  ALL missed time.  It is RARE that Corners survive that long in the NFL and its about time we started recognizing this fact.  Jaycee is a good bet because it hasnt been anything seriously devastating injury wise, and with his sample size he could and should be an incredible piece for the panthers through age 30. Jaire kinda flops on the other side, hes 28...so hes under 30, but he wants his payday before it comes up, hes also been injury prone lately.  Bulk of the contract will be on opposite side of 30.  Will both of these guys help us be better in 2026?  SURE!  No doubt, but the question is, will these guys help us past 2026...not sure. The investment isnt worth the risk, nor would the ROI be anywhere close to worth it.  Neither guy is moving us from a 6-8 win team to a 8-10 team, period. My point is we're in this state a 6-8 win team IMO and he projects us as  a 4-6 win team.  EVEN if we think Jaire or Ramsey will make us a 6-8 win team, it in NO WAY is worth the money or capital to move that much just to suck kinda less.  
×
×
  • Create New...