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!

     

Ron Rivera doesn't take dictation


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

One comment from early in Rivera's presser is likely to be misunderstood, and it's not that he explained it badly (just the opposite) but rather the fact that one of the terms he used has become so cliched' that it makes it easy to miss what he was really trying to say.

The word in question: "Balance" :sosp:

Regarding the offense, he said that he wants to have "a balanced attack". Now, folks hearing that might automatically assume he means an even run-pass ratio, but that's not really what he's talking about when you listen further.

Explaining the concept of balance, Rivera said that by balance he meant, "when you have to throw it, you will throw it; when you have to run it, you have to run it, but you choose to."

So what does that mean?

It means he doesn't like being dictated to :smash:

Rivera spoke at length about wanting to have an attacking, aggressive style on both defense and offense. Thus, what he's looking for on both sides of the ball is for our team to always control the game, set the pace, and force the other team to be the ones that have to react and adapt.

So let's say, for example, that we're facing a team that's strong against the run but vulnerable to the pass. That is one of those situations where you "have to pass". On the flipside, say you're facing a small, speedy defense that defends well against the pass but is weak against the run. That's when you "have to run". Facing someone that's solid overall? Out-execute them. Hit them with something they don't expect and make them play your game, because that's what you choose.

Ah, but how can you do all those things?

That's where "balance' comes in :thumbsup:

What Rivera wants is a Panthers team that's adaptable and capable of running whatever kind of game plan will work best against their opponent. A team that can power run, air-it-out, razzle-dazzle, whatever's needed.

John Fox wanted balance too, sort of. His primary focus was on the run game, and the passing game was only there to keep defenses honest. It's an approach that can work, but it malso meant that teams preparing to face the Panthers pretty much always knew what to expect. Rivera won't operate that way. He wants teams coming into Charlotte with no idea what we're gonna hit them with (and thus, no set answers).

If that "pick your poison" approach sounds familiar to you, it should. That's how New England likes to operate. Rivera wants the Panthers to work that way too. Make no mistake, that's not an easy thing to put together. You have to have the right players to do it, guys that can learn and execute whatever you tell them to. It'll take some roster tweaking before we're at that level, but that's what Rivera has in mind when he talks about sitting down with Hurney and his people and hashing things out.

Bottom Line: No more sitting back and reacting on either side of the ball.

We're going on the attack :boxing_smiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I dont understand is how you a DC HC and dont know squat about offenses. If you see that the league is changing to a lot of pass plays, you're offense should be getting with the times. As a DC you should see this

That was Fox problem. Inability to accept change and he stayed so stubborn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my longtime criticisms of Fox - going all the way back to 2002, even - was that his style of coaching always seemed to produce one-dimensional units.

If the offense was good at running, they stunk at passing. If the defense was effective against the pass, they were weak against the run (etc etc).

Fox just never quite seemed able to put a complete unit together. Maybe that was a weakness of his approach, maybe ability, maybe lack of insight/analysis...don't know, and it really doesn't matter.

Rivera wants a team that forces you to pick your poison. Mind you, he still has to build it, but the desire for it is a good start :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing you might see in the scouting is more of an emphasis on really smart players.

New England puts a premium on players with "football intelligence". It's a necessity for them to be able to maintain their versatility.

I won't be surprised if that becomes a point of emphasis for us too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was glad he took the time to explain what he meant by "balanced" because when I first heard the word I thought "oh great here we go again" for a few seconds before he elaborated.

Hopefully we're done with boring run, run, run, punt (because it's not a bad play!!!!) football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yep, like I said, I don't mind guaranteeing them money, but make the contracts smaller amounts in order to minimize cap implications. I don't know about "half," the actual amounts, whether more or less than half, would have to be determined by the NFL and NFLPA (which will probably be highly contentious, if not "impossible").  I'm just for whatever leads to the best product on the field while also unaffecting my wallet. As an aside, the NFL owners are greedy bastards in my estimation. They're trying to keep a larger portion of the pie, but players' agents are greedy as well, and they've sewn seeds of greed among the players. It's not all their fault; we all know what our society has evolved into, but the NFL wants a bigger piece of our smaller pocketbooks and refuses to "negotiate" with us (that's why we don't have cheaper and more reasonable à la carte options to view games that they're gradually trying to migrate to paid TV), so fu<k 'em. And then on top of that we have guys trying to water down the product even more by feeding greed. Change the way things are done so that we can at least see players prove themselves on the field without throwing wrenches into the engine that pays guys that have proven they can play on a pro level.
    • So if one of the parents wants to buy the theatre group or the band lunch they should get banned?
    • OK, I didn't realize this was about high school, but...if I'm spending my personal money trying to help some kids out, then no one is going to tell me how to spend my money. I get enough of the government spending my money--allocating my tax dollars--to children who don't really need anything, and now they're trying to tell me how to spend my personal money? Sure, there are many other issues to consider and rabbit holes that we could go down due to ethical concerns because it concerns kids, and the need for transparency is extremely important, but maybe as opposed to trying to stop kids from benefitting in darkness, we need to open up the blinds (and blinders) a little bit so that they can benefit in the light. I get where you're coming from, but this is a loaded and layered issue, and I'm just trying to give you some food for thought. 
×
×
  • Create New...