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!

     

NFL Playoffs

Jackie Lee

By Jackie Lee,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The Packers just don't look like they belong on the field with the Eagles. It's only 7-0 but just feels like it's a matter of time before this gets ugly if something doesn't change fast.

It really does... Feels like the only reason for a FG attempt is if they inexplicably go away from the running game lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's not about any "cult". It's about Wilson sucking and being old and Fields being younger and more athletic with a lot more potential upside. They were 4-2 with Fields starting. They were 6-5 with Russell Wilson starting.

Fair but Wilson still played better than Fields did. Hence the switch. One of them is a QB, the other isn't.

Also, Fields has zero upside. That's like saying The Golden Calf of Bristol had upside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The Packers just don't look like they belong on the field with the Eagles. It's only 7-0 but just feels like it's a matter of time before this gets ugly if something doesn't change fast.

You can't count out Jordan Love. He can activate Jameis Winston mode at any point. I mean both the good and bad parts of Jameis.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

Fair but Wilson still played better than Fields did. Hence the switch. One of them is a QB, the other isn't.

Also, Fields has zero upside. That's like saying The Golden Calf of Bristol had upside.

The team played better with Fields out there. Just saying. Wilson had one great game against the Bengals. Aside from that it was basically a wash.

Oh wee mayne... the Packers are cooked. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PantherChris Grand Master

PantherChris

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Only being down 10-0 right now with zero offensive production and two turnovers feels borderline miraculous for GB.

Like the Chargers last night they have only one legit offensive weapon Jacob's.

 

Not shocking tbh

 

 

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
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Joe Bear
      Okay, now face the facta guyd

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • ForJimmy
      JJ Jansen on tanking

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • HaricotVert
      Potential changes to playoff seeding

      By HaricotVert · Posted

      I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...