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!

     

New Theory on why Fox said what he said.


PantherBrew

Recommended Posts

You know, the whole "Too early to name a starter crap".

I know there is a thread about this already, but I am narcissistic and need the attention, or I will die.

Anyways, this is what I am thinking.

I know we all think Fox hates Moore, and I used to think it too.

But the only explanation I can think of for why Fox wouldn't name Jimmy the starter for the whole season is out of respect for Moore. Okay... take a deep breath, I know I have just blown your mind.

Here is the reasoning: If it took at minimum two weeks for John to bench Matt Moore after a whole off season of being 'the guy'. Then he is not going to name Jimmy the starter for the entire season after one relatively good performance. Much like he didn't name Moore the starter last season after one good game.

So what I am saying, John Fox may be retarded, but he is not that retarded. Jimmy will start next week, but he will probably not be named official 'starter', until we win a game.

Okay, go back to your whack off session.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Then he is not going to name Jimmy the starter for the entire season after one relatively good performance. Much like he didn't name Moore the starter last season after one good game."

I'm a little lost here. Are you saying Clausen's first start yesterday was "one relatively good performance?"

Sorry, I'm not onboard with that synopsis of his game yesterday at all. I thought Clausen was terrible yesterday. If we were going to compare Moore and Clausen, which I don't believe is fair to either QB to begin with, their respective performances were all terrible.

Fox won't name a starter this soon because Clausen got crushed on the Panther's final offensive play and it took him 5 minutes to get off the field. He may very well be concussion tested today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Then he is not going to name Jimmy the starter for the entire season after one relatively good performance. Much like he didn't name Moore the starter last season after one good game."

I'm a little lost here. Are you saying Clausen's first start yesterday was "one relatively good performance?"

Sorry, I'm not onboard with that synopsis of his game yesterday at all. I thought Clausen was terrible yesterday.

Key word bud, relatively. Relatively speaking considering he is a rookie QB making his first start in week 3 against one of the better defenses in the league. It was 'relatively' good start and if you expect a lot better than you need to check your expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key word bud, relatively. Relatively speaking considering he is a rookie QB making his first start in week 3 against one of the better defenses in the league. It was 'relatively' good start and if you expect a lot better than you need to check your expectations.

Key mistake, bud, making comparisons. Clausen is Clausen, the guy named to start the game as QB. He's not Moore, Manning or Mike Vick. He's not any better or worse than Sam Bradford or Charlie Batch. Making comparisons only serves to create an unrealistic expectation level... look what happened to Matt Moore when everyone began comparing him to Jake.

I have no expectations of the 2010 Carolina Panthers- I've been on record with that statement since the draft. There are for too many unknown variables in this team to create any expectations, one of them being the QB.

But I will say I don't care if the guy is a rookie or not, the fact remains he is the starting QB of a team that is simply not very good on the side of the ball he plays and if we were to speak "relatively"- the entire offense is horrible right now and that offense includes rookies and vets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key mistake, bud, making comparisons. Clausen is Clausen, the guy named to start the game as QB. He's not Moore, Manning or Mike Vick. He's not any better or worse than Sam Bradford or Charlie Batch. Making comparisons only serves to create an unrealistic expectation level... look what happened to Matt Moore when everyone began comparing him to Jake.

I have no expectations of the 2010 Carolina Panthers- I've been on record with that statement since the draft. There are for too many unknown variables in this team to create any expectations, one of them being the QB.

But I will say I don't care if the guy is a rookie or not, the fact remains he is the starting QB of a team that is simply not very good on the side of the ball he plays and if we were to speak "relatively"- the entire offense is horrible right now and that offense includes rookies and vets.

Haha, I am the one making comparisons between Jimmy and other players? and I am the one with unrealistic expectations?

are you fuging with me? cause if you are, props to you :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, I am the one making comparisons between Jimmy and other players? and I am the one with unrealistic expectations?

are you f**king with me? cause if you are, props to you :D

Did you not use the term "relatively?" You stated Clausen had a relatively good performance, which means "compared to or relative to someone or something else," right? I'm simply asking the question here, because that sounds like a comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am comparing 'his first start and performance', not him as a quarterback, to other rookie QB's making their first start.

Yea his performance was terrible compared to Brady or Manning's "Performance" from yesterday. But compared to other rookies first starts and performances in their first starts, it was relatively good, and it was also relatively good compared to what Moore has done this season.

I am not the one with unrealistic expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am comparing 'his first start and performance', not him as a quarterback, to other rookie QB's making their first start.

Yea his performance was terrible compared to Brady or Manning's "Performance" from yesterday. But compared to other rookies first starts and performances in their first starts, it was relatively good, and it was also relatively good compared to what Moore has done this season.

I am not the one with unrealistic expectations.

I wasn't taking exception with what you were saying because I simply was trying to understand what you making the comparison to. Sorry if I offended, it wasn't my intention.

That being said, my opinion is that his performance was lousy without any comparisons because other rookies have/had other teams, players, coaches, etc., know what I mean?

Sam Bradford had a great day compared to Clausen, but I don't think it's necessarily right to compare the two because they have nothing in common except the fact they're both rooks. It's a collective effort as far as I'm concerned and Jimmy Clausen's miserable performance is being held out for public scrutiny because of his position and his name hype.

But his miserable performance is also a result of equally miserable performances by the O-line, rookie WRs, coaching, playcalling, etc.

The lack of experience, the number off rookies, the inability of the coaching staff; ultra-conservative, vanilla, unimaginative playcalling that make up this team are the reasons I have for walking into BOA every Sunday home game with no expectations...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If we pay Bryce like a franchise QB we're completely and utterly buttfuged.
    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...