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!

     

Dave Canales for Coach of the Year - NY Times


dep
 Share

Recommended Posts

Quote

Dave Canales, Carolina Panthers (+2500)

Canales’ odds are actually worse than they were during the preseason (+1400), which is at least a little peculiar. The Panthers exceeded their preseason win total of 6.5 with their upset of the Rams on Sunday. Frankly, if Canales can lead Carolina to its first postseason appearance since 2017, his candidacy will get a lot more attention. It’s hardly out of the question, as the Panthers trail the increasingly shaky Bucs by just a half-game in the NFC South, and two games with Tampa Bay remain on the schedule. Still, there’s the feeling that Carolina’s success has been done with a lot of smoke and mirrors, as it ranks 22nd in EPA per play on offense and 25th in EPA per play on defense.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6855384/2025/12/02/nfl-coach-of-the-year-odds-mike-vrabel-ben-johnson/

spacer.png

 

spacer.png

  • Pie 6
  • The D 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

his name should be in contention

according to stupid AI stuff, here's the criteria. Dave checks most, if not all, of the boxes

Key criteria for the award

  • Team improvement: A significant year-over-year improvement in wins is a common factor. 
  • Elite record: Achieving a winning record, often with 10 or more wins, is a strong indicator. 
  • Overcoming adversity: Success despite injuries or other significant challenges can make a coach a strong candidate. 
  • Narrative: The award is often narrative-driven, rewarding coaches who are seen as having a breakout season or turning around a struggling team. 
  • Lack of a star quarterback: Coaches are more likely to be credited if their quarterback is not perceived as an elite, MVP-caliber player. 
  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SmokinwithWilly said:

I can't see anyone but Vabrel getting it. He turned that team around in a big damn hurry. 

He is a lock at the moment. He would have to get bounced from the playoffs un embarrassing fashion to even have the voters question it. Canales would have to get to the nfc title game i would imagine to even enter the conversation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Loyalty4Life said:

When do they have to vote?

With all the dysfunction in Chicago and the stories coming out about Calab earlier this year, I'd go with Ben Johnson.

He's probably #2 right now. He's got to make some noise in the playoffs like Canales will need to if they want to be taken seriously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guy should be in contention for getting fired before he's in contention for COY.

He's a HC who made his bones as a QB/Passing coach, but we're winning because of our defense and running game, despite him doing his best efforts to mess with the running game mid season.

He gets 100% credit for the very impressive turnaround he's done on our locker room culture, no question about it and I'm very thankful for that as it was really ugly before him.  But that only goes so far for me, and I can't stand his game planning and play calling, they're atrocious.  In today's NFL, if you can't be a great game day coach, you're never going to win at a high level.

I'm obviously one of those who want to move on from Bryce this offseason, but I want to move on from Canales significantly more.

Good guy, great locker room leader, but I just don't see it from him as an actual coach, especially one who is basically also the OC for all intents and purposes.  There aren't a lot of Dan Campbell's out there who can be a great coach just as a leader, and they need outstanding coordinators and players to make it work.

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

    • Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...