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!

     

Sporters reporters forecast Panthers record


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

That's what the coaches are there for. They cannot let 1 player negatively impact the team overall. If that continues it's on the coaches. So the overall record is on the coaches. What they do and who they play is solely on them. Its a team sport and w/l record is on everyone, specifically the head coach.

In the event a team is picking in  the top 10 in a year with QB options and a meh QB going into their 4th year they are absolutely having that conversation. The Bears just did that with Fields going into his 4th year. Add in coaching changes and it becomes even more volatile. 

I also never said the record was on the QB. I did say the record has an affect on that situation, just like I gave an example of above.

Edited by Waldo
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cranky said:

Around 70% of their projections will land within 1.5 wins of the preseason totals. That's good but not perfect.

A couple of notable exceptions are:

2023 Jets: The were projected for 9.5 wins but Rogers was hurt week one and went 7-10.

2021 Bengals were projected at 6.5 and went 10-7 going to the SB. That was the year Burrows came back from an injury and Chase was added through the draft.

2023 Texans were projected for 6.5 wins but went 10-7 thanks to a phenominal rookie season from Stroud.

The point being, the emergence of a QB ( or decline) can change those lines quickly. IF, Young continues were he left off at AND Tet is what they hope, then the 6.5 projected wins could be another "notable exception"

You're not going to find perfect. There's a reason they are called exceptions. They are outliers that fans use to have hope for their team. Its not something you bet on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Waldo said:

In the event a team is picking in  the top 10 in a year with QB options and a meh QB going into their 4th year they are absolutely having that conversation. The Bears just did that with Fields going into his 4th year. Add in coaching changes and it becomes even more volatile. 

I also never said the record was on the QB. I did say the record has an effect on that situation, just like I gave an example of above.

I didn't say anything about conversations. You seem to be already placing blame on an outcome that hasn't happened yet. If they are picking in the top 10 I can guarantee it's due to more than just qb play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

I didn't say anything about conversations. You seem to be already placing blame on an outcome that hasn't happened yet. If they are picking in the top 10 I can guarantee it's due to more than just qb play.

Theroetical conversation if the team is sitting at 6 or less wins. Where is the blame anywhere in my posts? All I said is that in that situation that conversation would be likely. Yes picking top 10 would be more than just QB but then again with new staff that conversation becomes more likely. Why the deflection into blame and more than QB? Nothing I have posted is even abrasive just saying that at 6 wins, top 10 pick again, some likely new staff, a better QB class than '25 and they should be looking at QBs. A rookie QB deal is the sweet spot for any team along with a QB on a rookie deal should cement their worth in those 3 years before committing to the 5th option. 

Edited by Waldo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Theroetical conversation if the team is sitting at 6 or less wins. Where is the blame anywhere in my posts? All I said is that in that situation that conversation would be likely. Yes picking top 10 would be more than just QB but then again with new staff that conversation becomes more likely. Why the deflection into blame and more than QB? Nothing I have posted is even abrasive just saying that at 6 wins, top 10 pick again, some likely new staff, a better QB class than '25 and they should be looking at QBs. A rookie QB deal is the sweet spot for any team along with a QB on a rookie deal should cement their worth in those 3 years before committing to the 5th option. 

If the coach allows a player that's costing the team win games to continue to play then who is that on? Canales and Dan went all in on Young for this season without a backup plan. If Young founders then it's on the coach to pull his ass and start someone else. That's how it works. I expect there will be more than a qb change if they finish with a top 10 draft pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

If the coach allows a player that's costing the team win games to continue to play then who is that on? Canales and Dan went all in on Young for this season without a backup plan. If Young founders then it's on the coach to pull his ass and start someone else. That's how it works. I expect there will be more than a qb change if they finish with a top 10 draft pick.

Again I said it's not about blame. 

They literally have no one else because they refused to being in anyone playable. Dalton was good for 1 fun game and now that's in question. That ship already sailed. Again no blame, I just said maybe because of the situation of a 3rd year QB and what is projected as a better QB draft than the last draft. 6 wins and a top 10 pick the only ways QB isn't being looked at is if he shuts it down through play or the draft is another wasteland.  

Edited by Waldo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

The team record is on the coaches. The players are evaluated individually. 

For sure but I think its pretty rare, and I could be wrong, but if you picking in the top 7ish pretty much everything has gone wrong.  I cannot think of any recent examples where a team was picking that high and their offense was lights out.  

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not football related, but UNC basketball player Seth Trimble used his NIL money to buy the Ben & Jerry's franchise on Franklin Street in Chapel Hill. https://www.tarheelblog.com/unc-basketball/46475/seth-trimble-now-owns-ben-jerrys-in-chapel-hill Definitely a smarter move than buying a Lambo.
    • I was bored at work today so I typed up my ideas for CFB realignment: D1 college football would be split into 2 tiers of 5 conferences each: Power 5 (P5) and Group of 5 (G5) conferences. To bring the total number of FBS teams to an even 140, the following FCS teams would make the moved up into the G5 tier: North Dakota State, South Dakota State, Montana State and Sacramento State. The P5 tier would consist of 50 teams with 10 teams per conference. Every team would play every other team in it's conference every year. There would be no conference championship games in P5 tier since teams will play each other during the season to provide the head-to-head tie breaker. The G5 tier would consist of 90 teams in 5 conferences of 18 teams split into 2 divisions. Teams would play every team in their division every year along with teams from the other division on a rotating schedule. G5 conference championship games would be held the week following the Army-Navy game between the two division winners from each G5 conference. In the event that Army and Navy are the two division winners in the American conference, the Army-Navy game itself would decide the conference championship. P5 tier would retain the current 12-team playoff structure and seeding rules with the existing Bowl Game rotation remaining in place. G5 tier would use a 16-team playoff with conference champions guaranteed the top-5 seeds + homefield advantage in the 1st round. Seeds 6-16 would be decided by national rankings. Homefield advantage would be decided by seeding in the 2nd round with the G5 National Championship held at a neutral site. There would be a promotion/relegation system in place. Each P5 conference would have a satellite conference in the G5 as follows:  - ACC/American  - Big 10/MAC  - PAC/MWC  - SEC/Sun Belt  - SWC/C-USA Every 5 years the team in each P5 conference with the worst W-L record over the previous 5 seasons would be relegated to their conference's G5 satellite. Likewise, the team with the best W-L record during the previous 5 seasons will be moved up into the P5. Any other movement of teams between conferences would be subject to approval by the CFB Competition Committee and teams are only permitted to switch conferences once every 10 years. The Walter Camp Award will be awarded to the best player in P5 tier. The Maxwell Award will serve as the G5's equivalent award. The Heisman Trophy will be awarded to the best player in the nation, regardless of conference or tier. POWER 5 CONFERENCES: ACC: Clemson Duke Florida State Miami N.C. State North Carolina Pittsburgh South Carolina Virginia Tech West Virginia BIG 10: Illinois Indiana Iowa Michigan Michigan State Nebraska Notre Dame Ohio State Penn State Wisconsin PAC-10: Boise State BYU California Colorado Oregon Stanford UCLA USC Utah Washington SEC: Alabama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi State Ole Miss Tennessee SWC: Arizona Arizona State Kansas State Missouri Oklahoma Oklahoma State SMU TCU Texas Texas A&M GROUP OF 5 CONFERENCES: AMERICAN: NORTH DIVISION: Army Boston College Connecticut Delaware Maryland Massachusetts Rutgers Syracuse Temple SOUTH DIVISION: Charlotte East Carolina James Madison Liberty Louisville Navy Old Dominion Virginia Wake Forest MAC: EAST DIVISION: Akron Bowling Green Buffalo Cincinnati Eastern Michigan Kent State Marshall Miami of Ohio Ohio WEST DIVISION: Ball State Central Michigan Iowa State Minnesota Northern Illinois Northwestern Purdue Toledo Western Michigan MWC: EAST DIVISION: Air Force Colorado State Montana State North Dakota State South Dakota State Tulsa UNLV Utah State UTEP WEST DIVISION: Fresno State Hawaii Nevada Oregon State Sacramento State San Diego State San Jose State Washington State Wyoming SUN BELT: EAST DIVISION: Appalachian State Coastal Carolina FAU FIU Georgia Southern Georgia Tech Kennesaw State UCF USF WEST DIVISION: Jacksonville State Middle Tennessee State South Alabama Southern Miss Troy Tulane UAB Vanderbilt Western Kentucky C-USA: EAST DIVISION: Arkansas State Houston Louisiana Louisiana Monroe Louisiana Tech Memphis Missouri State Rice Sam Houston State WEST DIVISION: Baylor Kansas New Mexico New Mexico State North Texas Texas State Texas Tech UTEP UTSA
×
×
  • Create New...