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!

     

Lockout coaching problem by PK

Cavscout

By Cavscout,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Cavscout Proficient

Cavscout

Posted
Posted

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/21/monday-morning-qb-week-11/index.html

There's a very good chance the new coach won't have access to the players beginning in March, when a potential lockout would happen. He may not have access to the players until a new labor deal is signed, which seems more and more like it won't happen until at least the summer. And that's being optimistic.

“I can’t imagine what the landscape would be like if a new coach walks into his first team meeting on August 11th and says to his team, ‘OK, guys, we’re switching from the 3-4 to the 4-3, so here’s the new defense,” “And we’re going to run the West Coast offense now. We play a game that counts in three weeks. Let’s get to work.’ I mean, it’s impossible. That’s why the in-house candidate will be more attractive than ever.

In Carolina, there's not an obvious guy in-house, though owner Jerry Richardson wants to keep the coaching payroll down, so he could think of promoting from within.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/21/monday-morning-qb-week-11/index.html#ixzz169M1lTOK

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ladypanther Grand Master

ladypanther

Posted
Posted

Also there:

I think Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck is one special player. (Wow. Stop the presses.) Not just as a thrower either. The run he made against Cal Saturday shows everything NFL scouts need to see about the mobile side of his game. Put it this way: Without mobility, he'd still be the first pick in the 2011 draft. With the mobility, I could see teams fighting over him. But if Buffalo has the pick, forget it. Buddy Nix might be getting up there in years, but he's not stupid. He won't trade away the right to pick Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CatMan72 Enthusiast

CatMan72

Posted
Posted

What would stop the coach from getting together with the players on a voluntary basis? With a young team like ours and a new coach, who wouldn't show up? LOL

The '82 Skins did it, without the coach... and it was one of the major reasons why they were able to hit the ground running when the season started up again.

It wouldn't be the same as a real practice, etc... but the coach could get to know is players and start implementing his playbook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TD alt
      An Offensive Tackle for the Long Term, but....

      By TD alt · Posted

      First, apologies @MHS831, I know you began this about tackles, and it was good. But... Frank, your post is just another Bryce sucks post. You obviously believe, like your buddy, that if we draft a WR it's all about evaluating Bryce Young or coddling Bryce Young. In short, it would be about improving the damned team. If anything, if Bryce is as destined to fail (or is already a failure right now... irredeemable), then another playmaker at WR would just seal the envelope and send him on his way. In my world, that's a good thing.  If some of you think that Bryce is a lame duck, then why wouldn't you want to set the offense up for the next QB to come in and be dropped into the offense to have success? Or, maybe you think it's all a moot point anyway because Tepper sucks, Dan Morgan sucks, Canales sucks, Ejiro sucks, Brandt Tilis sucks---everybidy sucks! If that's the case, then why does anyone care who or what we draft? Obviously some of you have all the answers and can run a gotdamn franchise better than the FO does now.
    • Swaggasaurus
      An Offensive Tackle for the Long Term, but....

      By Swaggasaurus · Posted

      Yeah man, idk. I’m not super big on looking at the position group overall and damning the group. I’ll do the same with less words for WR. I think Proctor is the ultimate fit because he could be your future left or right tackle or left or right guard. Guys a starter, how much Zavala, Christensen, Curhan, and Corbett did we see last year again? Mauigoa will not be there when we pick, but you take him for the same reason you take Proctor minus maybe the LT. Freeling *could* be an upgrade at LT for the future. You don’t take Miller or Iheanahor because the position flexibility isn’t there, likely RT only guys. Those Utah guys are light in the ass, don’t want. Now I do WR. All extremely unproductive when compared to previous Round 1 WR. Tate- Gone Lemon- Complete player, not a burner, would take at 19 Tyson- Made of glass, Colorado washout  Cooper- Not the best hands. Like 300 of his yards were lucky ass stumble blooper looking poo. Bernard gives you similar but better in the 2nd. KC- Slaps then catches the ball. Lightning fast for about 20 yards. Good return man. poo QBs probably more to unlock. Would take at 19 if Proctor, Freeling, Lemon were gone. Washington guy- Lumbers, the smoothness Canales hyped for TMac, not there with him. We need a different style player.    
    • frankw
      2026 Charlotte Hornets

      By frankw · Posted

      Logically yes. Boston has the right balance though. Jalen Brown is #2 in the paint and their best shooters are 17th and 19th. While our best shooters are #1 and #2 and we have one player in the top 50 for points in the paint. And my understanding looking at the information I just referenced is we were basically at the exact same paint percentage last year in Charles Lee's offense. At the end of the day we either want to compete for a playoff series winner and the finals or we just want to stumble our way to another play in. We've already done that with James Borrego.
×
×
  • Create New...