Setting Realistic Expectations: Panthers 2010 & solving the riddle: 2013.(LONG)

[Pimpdaddy]

JR has set up this team to be very good in the future, we will most likely see a new coach, and more teams than the Browns are interested in Fox.

QUOTE]

If any team wants Fox they haven't been paying attention....

[Fiz]

I don't think he played so bad that, in any other year, with any other team it would have resulted him in getting benched.

what in the world are you talking about? How worse would he have had to play for you to justify him being benched?

was vince young unjustly benched after similar circumstances?

He threw some bad picks, but the rest of the team made some bad mistakes that, had they made them we could have won those games and he would still have a job.

Yes but they don't have any better upgrade options at offensive line (injuries) or wide receiver (no players), and very little depth in the secondary. I'm sure if we had a stud high pick safety Charles Godfrey would be riding the Pine, or if the Panthers had a top flight receiver project he'd be the number 2 starter.

Clausen is where they think they can make an upgrade and they're doing it.

In other words his performance alone would have not been enough to cost him his job if we would have won those games.

This is really a dumb thing to say because he would have had to perform better for the Panthers to win those games. Unless you're saying if he had played the same way and the defense had committed like fifteen turnovers and had a poo ton of touchdowns but it's not like Tony Banks was allowed to chuck up wounded ducks all day just because his defense was incredible in 2000.

And his performance alone was not the only thing that resulted in us losing.

See above. Many things made us lose. He's the one spot they can try to make an improvement.

Maybe the first game, but definitley not last week.

well of all the factors that contributed to the loss, the passing game is certainly the most glaring. Minus one ridiculously amazing play by Johs Freeman, the defense gives up 13 points. That's with Moore turning the ball over so much.

The offensive line can't be expected to do much.

Hell, Dave Gettis and Dante Rosario managed to get wide open and Moore couldn't execute the pitch and catch throw.

Your conspiracy argument seems to hinge on the ridiculous idea that moore didn't play "that bad," and i shudder to think how much farther the bottom can fall out in your world of nfl caliber qb play.

[bababoey]

Love your original wirte up. Long but very thought out and informative.

I think most people are thinking there will not be a lock out in 2011. I happen to agree with that but I dont know how big the salary cap will be for 2011. In 2009 I think I remember the cap being are $120ish million. So most owners and front office guys are thinking that in 2011 the cap will be probally be somewhere in the high $130 or low $140 million range. But what if there is no lock out and the cap is only around $130 million. A lot of teams are going to have to dump some big players who make a lot of money. The other day I read an article on PFT that gave the current salary cap numbers for NFL teams in 2010. I think Washington was highest (shocker) but New Orleans was second I belive with like $170 million. Now that is for this year not next but if it is that high this year its got to be somewhat close to that next year.

Now everyone knows we have a lot of money to spend the next season there is football (2011 or 12 or whenever). The only team that will have a lower payroll that us the the Bucs and they are saving all there money because they have to pay for that soccer team they own in europe. So if you have money to spend would you not want it to be when others teams dont have as much and are forced to let some players they really like leave because of this.

Just a thought.

[panthers55]

Love your original wirte up. Long but very thought out and informative.

I think most people are thinking there will not be a lock out in 2011. I happen to agree with that but I dont know how big the salary cap will be for 2011. In 2009 I think I remember the cap being are $120ish million. So most owners and front office guys are thinking that in 2011 the cap will be probally be somewhere in the high $130 or low $140 million range. But what if there is no lock out and the cap is only around $130 million. A lot of teams are going to have to dump some big players who make a lot of money. The other day I read an article on PFT that gave the current salary cap numbers for NFL teams in 2010. I think Washington was highest (shocker) but New Orleans was second I belive with like $170 million. Now that is for this year not next but if it is that high this year its got to be somewhat close to that next year.

Now everyone knows we have a lot of money to spend the next season there is football (2011 or 12 or whenever). The only team that will have a lower payroll that us the the Bucs and they are saving all there money because they have to pay for that soccer team they own in europe. So if you have money to spend would you not want it to be when others teams dont have as much and are forced to let some players they really like leave because of this.

Just a thought.

Don't confuse cap with payroll. Our payroll in 2009 was 112 million counting Peppers. This year due to Delhomme it is 112 million again.

Next year we have 60 million committed but if and when we sign our core group of players, all the up front signing bonuses will be included in that year's payroll since it was paid up front even if the cap hit is spread out over several years. So for example if we sign Williams for 40 million for 5 years with 25 up front and a 2011 salary of 2 million- his cap could be 7 million for example, but his salary for 2011 will be 27 million and that is what will be accounted for in the payroll figures. So teams like New Orleans might have a huge payroll if they signed players long-term but it might have a much lower cap. If we signed a bunch of guys to long term contracts with up front bonus money, our payroll could easily be 160 million although the cap will be much less.

Just sayin........................

[bababoey]

Don't confuse cap with payroll. Our payroll in 2009 was 112 million counting Peppers. This year due to Delhomme it is 112 million again.

Next year we have 60 million committed but if and when we sign our core group of players, all the up front signing bonuses will be included in that year's payroll since it was paid up front even if the cap hit is spread out over several years. So for example if we sign Williams for 40 million for 5 years with 25 up front and a 2011 salary of 2 million- his cap could be 7 million for example, but his salary for 2011 will be 27 million and that is what will be accounted for in the payroll figures. So teams like New Orleans might have a huge payroll if they signed players long-term but it might have a much lower cap. If we signed a bunch of guys to long term contracts with up front bonus money, our payroll could easily be 160 million although the cap will be much less.

Just sayin........................

The numbers I were refering to were cap numbers. New Orleans was like $170 ours was like $110 million. But that included all the money Jake got when he was cut and Kemo and Lewis etc...

When a guy gets 5 year $35 million contract with $25 guarnteed and a $20 million dollar sigining bouuse most people seem to think that he gets alot of money in up front in the first few years of his contract. He may get the money then but it is accounted for on the cap differently. The $20 million gets spread out over the 5 years evenly unless part of it is actually a roster bonuse, which agents include in the signing bouse numbers all the time. The roster bounse gets included in the cap only in the year that he recieves it. The salary numbers must have the pro rated portion of the signing bonuse and the roster bonuse added to it for each year to get that players cap number.

The $25 million guarnteed usually means the signing bouse plus the years that the team guarntees for that player. So even if they cut him they will pay for thoes years of the contract.

See I use to do this stuff for a living so and I had to read over contracts daily (not for football but something else). I dont know alot but they made me take classes on contract law which is so damn boring I dont see how anyone could do that.

[Squirrel]

The numbers I were refering to were cap numbers. New Orleans was like $170 ours was like $110 million. But that included all the money Jake got when he was cut and Kemo and Lewis etc...

When a guy gets 5 year $35 million contract with $25 guarnteed and a $20 million dollar sigining bouuse most people seem to think that he gets alot of money in up front in the first few years of his contract. He may get the money then but it is accounted for on the cap differently. The $20 million gets spread out over the 5 years evenly unless part of it is actually a roster bonuse, which agents include in the signing bouse numbers all the time. The roster bounse gets included in the cap only in the year that he recieves it. The salary numbers must have the pro rated portion of the signing bonuse and the roster bonuse added to it for each year to get that players cap number.

The $25 million guarnteed usually means the signing bouse plus the years that the team guarntees for that player. So even if they cut him they will pay for thoes years of the contract.

See I use to do this stuff for a living so and I had to read over contracts daily (not for football but something else). I dont know alot but they made me take classes on contract law which is so damn boring I dont see how anyone could do that.

I see what you are saying but once a player is cut the bonus is put in that year.

[HPPantherzfan]

I see what you are saying but once a player is cut the bonus is put in that year.

But what does that have to do with our situation? Contracts are up, bonuses have been paid via the life of the contracts. If we "cut" or "release" some of these players at the end of this season how does it affect us?

Either way, with a CBA or not we are still sitting pretty.

[bababoey]

But what does that have to do with our situation? Contracts are up, bonuses have been paid via the life of the contracts. If we "cut" or "release" some of these players at the end of this season how does it affect us?

Either way, with a CBA or not we are still sitting pretty.

Thank you someone understood.

We have cut all the players we are going to. We might not resign some of our free agents. But all I was trying to say was we will have a lot of cap space no matter what the cap is in 2011 or 2012 whenever we start playing football again.

It could be in the area of $60 to $70 million. A smart team can buy a whole side of a team, offense or defense, for that amount.

[PantherFanForLife]

what in the world are you talking about? How worse would he have had to play for you to justify him being benched?

was vince young unjustly benched after similar circumstances?

I don't know the circumstances with Vince, but in Sunday's game Matt had 1TD, 1 Interception and 1 pick. It's not good, but it's also not a horrible performance that would typically cost a starting QB his job especially considering this team with the number of rookies, O-line problems and lack of receivers. If you don't believe Clausen will have similar outputs throughout this season if the rest of the team doesn't improve, I would call you a bit optimistic.

If you wanted to bench him after his first game, it would have been more understanding. But Matt's performance Sunday was actually a pretty big improvement over the first week and the only big mistake I saw from him, was the interception.

The number of plays where our defensive players and receivers also messed up were just as many. And those guys did not get permanently benched.

Yes but they don't have any better upgrade options at offensive line (injuries) or wide receiver (no players), and very little depth in the secondary. I'm sure if we had a stud high pick safety Charles Godfrey would be riding the Pine, or if the Panthers had a top flight receiver project he'd be the number 2 starter.

Clausen is where they think they can make an upgrade and they're doing it.

I agree. Which is why I support the move to Clausen. Because I do think he could do better with this same team. But not because the team is great and our QB is bad. But because the team is overall shaky, and Clausen can release the ball quicker when the O-line lets him down where as Matt could not.

This is really a dumb thing to say because he would have had to perform better for the Panthers to win those games. Unless you're saying if he had played the same way and the defense had committed like fifteen turnovers and had a poo ton of touchdowns but it's not like Tony Banks was allowed to chuck up wounded ducks all day just because his defense was incredible in 2000.

No what I'm saying he could have performed exactly the same but if the rest of the team didn't "drop the ball" in a couple of situations, we could have won that game. It was closer than some think despite the final score. Numbers don't lie in this case.

Tampa Bay - Carolina

1st Downs 14 16

Passing 1st downs 7 10

Rushing 1st downs 5 6

1st downs from Penalties 2 0

3rd down efficiency 6-14 5-16

4th down efficiency 0-0 3-4

Total Plays 59 66

Total Yards 273 278

Passing 178 159

Comp-Att 12-25 13-29

Yards per pass 7.1 5.5

Rushing 95 119

Rushing Attempts 34 33

Yards per rush 2.8 3.6

Red Zone (Made-Att) 1-3 0-1

Penalties 4-30 4-48

Turnovers 0 3

Fumbles lost 0 1

Interceptions thrown 0 2

Defensive / Special Teams TDs 0 0

Possession

If Rosario hung on to that deep ball we would have gone in half time tied. If the defense didn't failed to tackle Josh Freeman 3 times on 3rd and long which gave Tampa a first down and TD on the next play...we would have been tied or UP by one touchdown. And if those two things happened, it would have been a different ball game. Matt would have never gotten pulled in the 4th.

What I'm saying is there were just as many BIG missed opportunities or more that caused us to lose the game comitted by the rest of our team. Matt's mistakes, alone, didn't cost us the game, which is when it's typically ok in this league to bench a starting QB for a back-up rookie or an unproven one.

well of all the factors that contributed to the loss, the passing game is certainly the most glaring. Minus one ridiculously amazing play by Johs Freeman, the defense gives up 13 points. That's with Moore turning the ball over so much.

The offensive line can't be expected to do much.

Hell, Dave Gettis and Dante Rosario managed to get wide open and Moore couldn't execute the pitch and catch throw.

Your conspiracy argument seems to hinge on the ridiculous idea that moore didn't play "that bad," and i shudder to think how much farther the bottom can fall out in your world of nfl caliber qb play.

What conspiracy argument? I'm not saying there is any kind of conspiracy going on here. I just don't like how you take up for everyone else but give Matt 0 slack. The offensive line can't be expected to do much? Why not? Why can't we expect them to protect better?

This is where your bias shows. You expect Matt to win the game despite all of our other problems, but you refuse to expect the team as a whole to win despite Matt's problems. That's kind of backwards don't you think?

I'm by no means a Matt lover, or Clausen hater...I just call them like I see. There are plenty of QB's right now, including Sam Bradford that have their teams 0-2 and no one's benching them. Only difference is Matt didn't get a 50 million dollar contract and he wasn't the 48th overall pick in the draft, and the other guys don't have a coach that has the hottest seat in the league not to mention a more popular back-up breathing down their neck. Period.

[Fiz]

I don't know the circumstances with Vince, but in Sunday's game Matt had 1TD, 1 Interception and 1 pick. It's not good, but it's also not a horrible performance that would typically cost a starting QB his job especially considering this team with the number of rookies, O-line problems and lack of receivers.

is that really all you care about? the most basic, simple stats you can find?

Does it not matter that instead of going through progression Moore rolled out of the pocket, ignored his wide open receiver, and ran 4 yards short of the line of scrimmage out of bounds (this happened more than once by the way)

If you don't believe Clausen will have similar outputs throughout this season if the rest of the team doesn't improve, I would call you a bit optimistic.

No, I'm going to go ahead and assume Clausen won't panic and take out of bounds sacks and fail to go through his progressions and reads, since he immediately came in sunday and did both of them.

If you wanted to bench him after his first game, it would have been more understanding. But Matt's performance Sunday was actually a pretty big improvement over the first week and the only big mistake I saw from him, was the interception.

I'm sorry you don't know what you're watching. The overthrows to Gettis and Rosario weren't mistakes? His 37.5 completion percentage wasn't a mistake? Taking two sacks by running out of bounds wasn't a mistake?

No what I'm saying he could have performed exactly the same but if the rest of the team didn't "drop the ball" in a couple of situations, we could have won that game.

So if someone there had been better execution between Rosario and Gettis, and the defense held, then you'd be alright with Moore's 45% completion percentage because they managed to pull it out?

Doesn't matter how bad he is, just as long as he pulls a couple of plays out of his ass when it matters?

If Rosario hung on to that deep ball we would have gone in half time tied.

that wasn't on Rosario. I sit in section 126 and that happened right in front of me. That ball was overthrown. Don't put blame where it doesn't belong.

If the defense didn't failed to tackle Josh Freeman 3 times on 3rd and long which gave Tampa a first down and TD on the next play...we would have been tied or UP by one touchdown. And if those two things happened, it would have been a different ball game. Matt would have never gotten pulled in the 4th.

They put Clausen in the game when there was still a chance to win it. You don't know what they would have done.

Hopefully the coaching staff isn't stupid enough to stick with a guy just because of two plays in the unknowable retrospective he didn't fug up.

What I'm saying is there were just as many BIG missed opportunities or more that caused us to lose the game comitted by the rest of our team.

well you've managed to name two, one of which you're wrong about.

Matt's mistakes, alone, didn't cost us the game, which is when it's typically ok in this league to bench a starting QB for a back-up rookie or an unproven one.

how about when the QB looks shell shocked? how about when he can't make progressions, as Zod reported? how about when they can't get rid of the ball? how about when they've lost the ball 6 times in 2 games, all of which have been their fault? how about when they throw 3 interceptions in the end zone? how about when they complete less than 40 percent of their passes, and it's not like most of them are close?

Can you bench them then? Or do you ride them out because in your mind someone didn't make a play that wouldn't have had much of a difference in the grand scheme of his performance.

Don't think I'm for benching Moore because they lost the game. Unlike you, I actually know what I'm watching out there.

I just don't like how you take up for everyone else but give Matt 0 slack.

I'm taking up for people?

The offensive line can't be expected to do much? Why not? Why can't we expect them to protect better?

Because Jordan Gross is visibly still recovering from injury, jeff Otah is not playing, Schwartz is playing out of position, and the Bucs were able to put Tanard Jackson right up on the line to stop the run because they knew Moore couldn't pass. They even said as much. Doesn't matter how good the line is, 5 people are not going to open up lanes against 8.

This is where your bias shows. You expect Matt to win the game despite all of our other problems, but you refuse to expect the team as a whole to win despite Matt's problems. That's kind of backwards don't you think?

Why do you think exactly I want Matt benched because they lost?

Where have I said that? Are you making something up to argue against?

I THINK YOU ARE!

I'm by no means a Matt lover, or Clausen hater...I just call them like I see.

you don't see poo.

There are plenty of QB's right now, including Sam Bradford that have their teams 0-2 and no one's benching them. Only difference is Matt didn't get a 50 million dollar contract and he wasn't the 48th overall pick in the draft, and the other guys don't have a coach that has the hottest seat in the league not to mention a more popular back-up breathing down their neck. Period.

well that's a really dumb thing to say.

Firstly, Sam Bradford is a rookie quarterback who just finished his fourth month of nfl action. Matt Moore is a fourth year player who was making the 10th start of his career. You would hope that Matt wouldn't look like a high school quarterback, but he did.

Secondly, Fox's seat isn't hot. It's not there. Fox is gone after this year regardless, and it's been the worst kept secret in the NFL for months.

Lastly, of all the coaches to accuse of bending to fan pressure, you choose the guy who started Jake Delhomme for 11 games in 2009? Who turned to Vinny Testaverde over Matt Moore in 2007? Who started Deshaun Foster over DeAngelo Williams in 2006 and 2007? Yes, clearly John Fox, with his non existent hot seat, is going to completely go against the grain with everything he's ever done in his career and bend to fan pressure because the Panthers got a douche bag QB from the most hated school in the country.

get

the

fug

out

[PantherFanForLife]

is that really all you care about? the most basic, simple stats you can find?

Does it not matter that instead of going through progression Moore rolled out of the pocket, ignored his wide open receiver, and ran 4 yards short of the line of scrimmage out of bounds (this happened more than once by the way)

Sure it does. I never once said Moore didn't make mistakes.

I'm sorry you don't know what you're watching. The overthrows to Gettis and Rosario weren't mistakes? His 37.5 completion percentage wasn't a mistake? Taking two sacks by running out of bounds wasn't a mistake?

Where did I say Moore didn't make mistakes? I said the only BIG mistakes. Every QB makes mistakes. So will Clausen. Doesn't change the fact Matt's performance this past week was improved over last, while still comitting mistakes.

And yes I do know what I'm watching. Other posters on this board agree with me. Rosario, HIMSELF, agrees with me.

The deep ball to Gettis was overthrown.

The deep ball to Rosario slipped right off Rosario's fingers.

This is exactly what I mean when I say you want to ignore the others and blame it all on Matt. It takes two people to make a reception. But right now, Moore's haters are putting all of it on Moore. You really mean to tell me our receivers are so f**king great, and played such a great game, Moore has no excuses?

So if someone there had been better execution between Rosario and Gettis, and the defense held, then you'd be alright with Moore's 45% completion percentage because they managed to pull it out?

If Rosario and Gettis held better then Moore wouldn't have only a 45% completion ratio now would he? Once again, you refuse to see the other side of things.

Doesn't matter how bad he is, just as long as he pulls a couple of plays out of his ass when it matters?

Ridiculous. It's like you don't even want to understand what I'm saying. The difference between winning and losing a football game is making the big play when the time comes, and not letting the big play get made by the other team. In that department we failed as a team, not just Matt.

that wasn't on Rosario. I sit in section 126 and that happened right in front of me. That ball was overthrown. Don't put blame where it doesn't belong.

Sorry but everyone and their mother knows I get a better angle of that throw during replays on my TV, than you ever will sitting in section 126. And I know what I saw too. That's why we have INSTANT REPLAY. Again, Rosario, himself, and a lot of other people that were not helping Fox sharpening his axe agree with this one.

well you've managed to name two, one of which you're wrong about.

And again...........you are stating something as fact that is your personal opinion, driven by bias, but the guy involved in the play himself disagrees with you. Just saying.....

I'm taking up for people?

Because Jordan Gross is visibly still recovering from injury, jeff Otah is not playing, Schwartz is playing out of position, and the Bucs were able to put Tanard Jackson right up on the line to stop the run because they knew Moore couldn't pass. They even said as much. Doesn't matter how good the line is, 5 people are not going to open up lanes against 8.

Yep you are. You just proved it again. You found an excuse for everyone of those guys. None for Matt. He doesn't get breaks like that. I call that bias. Not to mention why Otah not playing is an excuse FOR the guys playing I have no idea. In that case, maybe we should also look at benching some of them, no?

Why do you think exactly I want Matt benched because they lost?

Where have I said that? Are you making something up to argue against?

I THINK YOU ARE!

I never said you did. I said that's why I BELIEVE he got benched.

you don't see poo

well that's a really dumb thing to say.

Firstly, Sam Bradford is a rookie quarterback who just finished his fourth month of nfl action. Matt Moore is a fourth year player who was making the 10th start of his career. You would hope that Matt wouldn't look like a high school quarterback, but he did.

Secondly, Fox's seat isn't hot. It's not there. Fox is gone after this year regardless, and it's been the worst kept secret in the NFL for months.

Lastly, of all the coaches to accuse of bending to fan pressure, you choose the guy who started Jake Delhomme for 11 games in 2009? Who turned to Vinny Testaverde over Matt Moore in 2007? Who started Deshaun Foster over DeAngelo Williams in 2006 and 2007? Yes, clearly John Fox, with his non existent hot seat, is going to completely go against the grain with everything he's ever done in his career and bend to fan pressure because the Panthers got a douche bag QB from the most hated school in the country.

get

the

f**k

out

Well dude if I don't see poo and I say dumb things, why are you arguing with me? Just ignore me. To me it seems like whatever I'm saying is getting to you to the point where you have to result to personal insults.

And actually...that's exactly what the heck is happening...and everyone except you can see that. Every article thats currently being written on the net, every talk show, every reporter and most of this board agrees that Fox IS IN FACT acting completely different as he has in the past because his seat is on fire. He's been named the coach with the hottest seat in the league by a number of reporters. And his coaching yesterday, including going for it on 4th down, passing more and benching Matt, is completely un-Fox-like. Do your research.

[panthers55]

Thank you someone understood.

We have cut all the players we are going to. We might not resign some of our free agents. But all I was trying to say was we will have a lot of cap space no matter what the cap is in 2011 or 2012 whenever we start playing football again.

It could be in the area of $60 to $70 million. A smart team can buy a whole side of a team, offense or defense, for that amount.

First of all there is no guarantee that there will be a cap going forward. Because as it now stands not only is there not a cap but there is no floor either. Previously, teams had to spend 80% of the cap so there was little incentive to spend less. Now owners can spend as little as they like with no consequence. Players are realizing that without a floor, they could make much less than before.

Secondly, until a cap is put in place and we know what that number is, we don't know if we are well off or not. The owners want a 20% reduction in salaries which presumes a 20% reduction in the cap.

As for cutting players, we might be done in 2010 but may not resign a number of players next year. Kalil, Williams, Davis, and Moore come to mind right off the bat. In fact with a new coach or staff that decides to implement a new lok like a 3-4 for example, guys like Beason wouldn't necessarily fit the same as our DEs and most of our DTs (that is why I doubt we change schemes but what do I know??)

Cap space is simply money manipulation and fancy contracts but it means little. Teams like Washington have traditionally manipulated the cap to sign whoever they want. All it keeps you doing is signing a bunch of free agents or cutting folks randomly without a plan. But few if any teams actualy are hurt that much by the cap.

The real issue is not cap but payroll. Will Jerry loosen up the pursestrings to spend the 80-100 million more in guaranteed money it will take to keep our young talent here. If he decides not to, then we could easily be like Tampa was for years with suspect talent and a loss of players when then became free agents and leave or a lack of free agents who want to play here.

And that is my point. The cap savings are irrelevant since we don't know if there will be a new one or what that number will be. The real issue is whether Richardson will pay to keep all of the roster who are under 1 year deals, restricted free agents, free agents after this year, or like Beason have outplayed their contracts.

[panthers55]

But what does that have to do with our situation? Contracts are up, bonuses have been paid via the life of the contracts. If we "cut" or "release" some of these players at the end of this season how does it affect us?

Either way, with a CBA or not we are still sitting pretty.

Not if we don't spend the money to sign all of our young players whose contracts are up this year or expiring. By your logic Tampa Bay has been sitting pretty for the past several years since their cap has been at the bottom. But they have sucked because they have no talent. You are assuming that Richardson resumes his olds way of spending and we give big contracts to our young guys. Until he does, we aren't sitting anything. And if we don't play football next year, guys like Williams will still hit free agency and will be able to go elsewhere with no compensation. I would hate to lose Williams, Kalil, and Davis for example which is 2 first rounders and a second with no compensation until the following year at the least because we were sitting pretty not spending money.

[Fiz]

oh jesus christ I've picked a fight with a brick wall

Sure it does. I never once said Moore didn't make mistakes.

Where did I say Moore didn't make mistakes? I said the only BIG mistakes. Every QB makes mistakes. So will Clausen.

Well you claimed he shouldn't have been benched because he had "1TD, 1 Interception and 1 pick."

Whatever that means, it seems you think that's reason enough to discount the other horrible glaring problems.

Doesn't change the fact Matt's performance this past week was improved over last, while still comitting mistakes.

Really? Improvement? I mean, I guess he managed to raise his QB rating 27 points to a whopping sixty and he didn't throw 3 interceptions in the end zone.

He also threw half as many passes and completed a lower percentage of them. You want to call that an improvement?

And yes I do know what I'm watching. Other posters on this board agree with me. Rosario, HIMSELF, agrees with me.

oh, a player put the blame on himself. this has never happened. And where exactly did he say this, by the way?

This is exactly what I mean when I say you want to ignore the others and blame it all on Matt.

well you're f**king wrong.

It takes two people to make a reception.

and one not to overthrow it lol

But right now, Moore's haters are putting all of it on Moore.

Please don't lump me in with Moore haters. No one on this board was more vocal in starting him than I have been for the past three years.

You really mean to tell me our receivers are so f**king great, and played such a great game, Moore has no excuses?

Moore didn't look like an NFL QB.

If Rosario and Gettis held better then Moore wouldn't have only a 45% completion ratio now would he? Once again, you refuse to see the other side of things.

6-16 = 37.5%, his actual completion percentage

8-16 = 50%, what it would have been had rosario laid out and made an incredible catch and gettis been usain bolt.

45 was just a guess before looking at his numbers. Is there another side of basic f**king math?

Ridiculous. It's like you don't even want to understand what I'm saying. The difference between winning and losing a football game is making the big play when the time comes, and not letting the big play get made by the other team. In that department we failed as a team, not just Matt.

Holy poo I didn't know Tony Kornheiser posted on this forum!

Sorry but everyone and their mother knows I get a better angle of that throw during replays on my TV, than you ever will sitting in section 126.

lol okay

And I know what I saw too. That's why we have INSTANT REPLAY. Again, Rosario, himself, and a lot of other people that were not helping Fox sharpening his axe agree with this one.

ahahahahahahahahaha helping fox sharpen his axe oh my god you're a child

And again...........you are stating something as fact that is your personal opinion, driven by bias, but the guy involved in the play himself disagrees with you. Just saying.....

where did he say this again? And great, you've managed to name two.

Yep you are. You just proved it again. You found an excuse for everyone of those guys. None for Matt.

oh okay, here's matt's excuse. he's not very good.

He doesn't get breaks like that. I call that bias. Not to mention why Otah not playing is an excuse FOR the guys playing I have no idea. In that case, maybe we should also look at benching some of them, no?

otah not playing means schwartz is out of position, which kinda puts them at 3/5 of what they should be. also generally you grade the offensive line as a unit, and while they're not performing like they're expected to, it's disingenuous to talk about their performance without mentioning that they're a man down.

is there a reason Matt Moore has been awful that I don't know? Some injury?

Well dude if I don't see poo and I say dumb things, why are you arguing with me? Just ignore me. To me it seems like whatever I'm saying is getting to you to the point where you have to result to personal insults.

i believe in trimming this message board of its fat, and you fall squarely into that category.

Every article thats currently being written on the net, every talk show, every reporter and most of this board agrees that Fox IS IN FACT acting completely different as he has in the past because his seat is on fire.

every single article.

every

single

one.

seriously what middle school are you in?

He's been named the coach with the hottest seat in the league by a number of reporters.

tell me more things skip bayless says

And his coaching yesterday, including going for it on 4th down, passing more and benching Matt, is completely un-Fox-like. Do your reasearch.

actually if the last 3 years prove anything its fox's reluctance to play matt moore lmbo