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!

     

Only team with a winning record…


Diehardpanth02
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The only point totals that matter are the ones at the end of a game. 

In 2003, we started off hot but got manhandled in game five by the Titans. People said that 'exposed us', but it just turned out to be a bump in the road. Individual games can be different than the overall narrative. 

Of course, to be clear, my view of this season's overall narrative doesn't have us in the playoffs or ending as an upper echelon team.

Steps in the right direction perhaps, but we're still not that good... 

I remember in a Super Bowl season for them, New England took an opening week ass whipping from the Bills. You see this type of stuff quite often early in the season. 
An eventual playoff team losing to a bottom dweller that comes out strong, isn’t that rare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

You have spent a chunk of this thread arguing the opposite. I am perplexed by your tactics.

Not at all.

I said the only thing that matters about how many points scored is who has more at the end of the game. If you're losing games, you're scoring less points.

The only time point differential matters is in some playoff scenarios. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Not at all.

I said the only thing that matters about how many points scored is who has more at the end of the game. If you're losing games, you're scoring less points.

The only time point differential matters is in some playoff scenarios. 

I mean you literally are attempting to justify our -60 differential as unimportant in your first post in this thread.

Well, having a negative point differential(to the tune of -3.8/ppg) through 11 games is a very strong indicator of being a bad team. If anything, we have largely been overachieving stastically. 

The on field results also bear that out. So if we end up, and I think this is likely, as a 7-8 win team, with an even more substantially negative point differential at the end of this season how would this statistic not matter?

Point differential is the most basic statistic in existence that one can look at to largely guage the results. You do need to score more than your opponent to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, jasonluckydog said:

Not many of us had this team winning 6 games this season. Im still in on going to the SB. We will probably play the Jaguars. We win it all. 

Eh, I was very consistent on my 4-7 wins prediction. Looks like the upper end of that is possible and maybe even beating those expectations. 

It's been better than I anticipated in a lot of ways this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

I mean you literally are attempting to justify our -60 differential as unimportant in your first post in this thread.

Well, having a negative point differential(to the tune of -3.8/ppg) through 11 games is a very strong indicator of being a bad team. If anything, we have largely been overachieving stastically. 

The on field results also bear that out. So if we end up, and I think this is likely, as a 7-8 win team, with an even more substantially negative point differential at the end of this season how would this statistic not matter?

Point differential is the most basic statistic in existence that one can look at to largely guage the results. You do need to score more than your opponent to win.

Not to me. You win six games by 3 points but lose one by 30, you have a negative point differential but still have a winning record.

Stats are flukey in football. That's why I don't rely on them for evaluation. 

Again, my evaluation of this team is not that they're a great team or even a very good team. What I've seen doesn't bear that out.

I see an average to potentially above average team that can beat bad teams and also has been able to hang with some good ones. Mind you, that's an improvement from previous seasons but it's still not where we want to be. 

And no, I'm still not convinced we get to where we want to be with Bryce at the helm. But we have some challenging games coming up where he at least has a chance to prove me and other doubters wrong.

Bottom Line: I doubt my overall assessment of the team is all that different from yours. We just arrive at our respective takes via differing paths.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Not to me. You win six games by 3 points but lose one by 30, you have a negative point differential but still have a winning record.

Stats are flukey in football. That's why I don't rely on them for evaluation. 

Again, my evaluation of this team is not that they're a great team or even a very good team. What I've seen doesn't bear that out.

I see an average to potentially above average team that can beat bad teams and also has been able to hang with some good ones. Mind you, that's an improvement from previous seasons but it's still not where we want to be. 

And no, I'm still not convinced we get to where we want to be with Bryce at the helm. But we have some challenging games coming up where he at least has a chance to prove me and other doubters wrong.

Bottom Line: I doubt my overall assessment of the team is all that different from yours. We just arrive at our respective takes via differing paths.

So you think that is a common scenario over the course of a season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2025 at 3:20 PM, strato said:

I remember in a Super Bowl season for them, New England took an opening week ass whipping from the Bills. You see this type of stuff quite often early in the season. 
An eventual playoff team losing to a bottom dweller that comes out strong, isn’t that rare. 

Same season as us, I'm pretty sure.

They lost their opener 41-0 in what was a revenge game for a recently cut Lawyer Milloy. Everyone thought they were cooked. Didn't play out that way.

Stuff like that is why I don't put huge stock in stat driven analysis or poor early season / preseason performances. If you think back to week one, people had us contending for the number one pick this year after how we looked early on. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

So you think that is a common scenario over the course of a season?

I've seen it more than once, typically from slow starting teams that improve as the season progresses.

So far, that seems to fit Canales MO. It's why I think his offseason program needs some tinkering. 

Edited by Mr. Scot
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

    • It all sounds great. The only unknowns are injuries and how they will need to be addressed. Horn has a history as does the newly added Jaelen Phillips and Cooker has yet to play an entire season as well. And then there are the Ikey's - totally unexpecteded injuries that put a major wrench in your plans. I do think its a great plan though.
    • 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.          
×
×
  • Create New...