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!

     

WTF Rivera!!!!!????

TruCatzFan

By TruCatzFan,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

C47 Newbie

C47

Posted
Posted

Our defense was playing very well. I'll take a 6pt lead, and give them the ball on the 20 with 1:30 left any day.

Especially with a rookie QB....I mean I could understand peoples frustration if they had Tom Brady at QB but it wasn't....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HoFBound90 Newbie

HoFBound90

Posted
Posted

I'm not arguing with you guys. When I posted this, the game was still on and ^He was running clock deciding. It's easy for anybody to now after the fact to criticize. Nobody here is man enough to admit that this call could have costed us the game... I'm Super glad it didn't, but I didn't like the call.

We just picked up our 3rd win in 2 yrs...

I am Not mad

maybe you should just have thought it through instead of having knee jerk reaction and running online to tell people that the coach should do the opposite of the right thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mother Grabber Grand Master

Mother Grabber

Posted
Posted

I def agreed with the 2 pt conv. If something crazy happened (kick return) and they scored two TDs they would have had 24, meaning the 2 pts keeps us within 8

The chances of that happening are way low, and you can't formulate a game plan around the 1% oddball play.

After TD, we're up by 4. At this point, if they score another TD we tie with a FG and need a TD to win.

We have a 95% chance to hit the PAT. If they score at TD, we need a FG to win.

We have a 40%ish chance to get a 2pt conversion. Which only helps us if they score two TDs in the last 4min.

Up by 5 >>>> Up by 4

Up by 6 > Up by 5

The right play is to take the high percentage PAT to go up by 5, which gives us a huge advantage over being up by 4. It was a bad risk to go up by 6, which doesn't give us much of an advantage over being up by 5. High risk for low gain...bad gamble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TruCatzFan Newbie

TruCatzFan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I understand what everybody's saying about it being wet, but unless u watched a different game than I did it didn't rain in the second half. Granted the field was very mushy, there wasn't 2 or 3 inches of water standing on the field like some who have posted here have expressed. Plus for kicks you get a new ball, so there went the theory of a water logged ball.

I would have kicked the FG to guarentee the win. If he misses it, trust in your defense. Didn't we do that anyways?

Yep, I thought so.

And I for one had no faith that our secondary wouldn't give up a TD... They did it right b4 half.

Like I said earlier... After the game and in hindsight it's EASY for u all to disagree with me. You take points when u can get them.

Mare has a very strong leg, I have faith that He would have made it.

It doesn't matter though. We won, and I'm happy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
csx Grand Master

csx

Posted
Posted

You guys are all ridiculous!

IF* Gabbart leads them down and they win... Then what?

It's only a good move cause it worked out.

I completely disagree with the call. Take those 3 points and put the game out of reach!

They won and it doesn't matter what you think. It was the correct call AND it worked.

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

    • MHS831
      Some homers' opinions of the OTs that we may realistically be able to get at 19

      By MHS831 · Posted

      You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1.  I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter.  So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate.  QBs are a great example.  Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith.  Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there?  Wharton (280lbs)?  So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover?  A deep free safety?  A quality center? A playmaking TE?  A DT to replace Robinson?  A wide receiver to balance the secondary?  Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right.  Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.  
    • strato
      Off-season topic: WWYD? Total Branding Redesign

      By strato · Posted

      Put Huey P Newton on the helmet. With his AK. 
    • csx
      Baldinger on the 2026 LB Class

      By csx · Posted

      We arent switching. Evero is 3-4 to the core. Given how 3-4 has been a noticeable characteristic of top defenses recently and we have drafted and signed players fir it  I dont know why anyone would think that's a good idea 
×
×
  • Create New...