TSN blurb on what's next for Peppers

[frash.exe]

Fox has been the coach here seven seasons now. What exactly would be "good enough" for you over a seven-year span?

I could tell you this much it wouldn't be good enough for a lot of other NFL cities/states in the country.

[panthers55]

why worry about a draft pick to be used in April 2010 if there's a good chance that house will be cleaned in January?

When do most coach's and GM's get fired. You're right reading comprehension is your friend.

That is the point. Teams can have their first rounder this year and still have a 4 time probowler and only risk a future pick in 2010 and 2011. If that bring results people will feel that gambling future picks away was worth it. If it doesn't work, they will be gone when the draft picks are someone elses' problem.

Obviously the opposite would be true for us. If we trade peppers for future draft picks it will be because we are building for the future and Hurney and Fox are feeling secure about being here. By keeping Peppers and trading our first away for Brown we are suggesting that we are still all in and are needing to win this year.

If you can't easily see that, then it explains why you went to WVU

[Fireball77]

Fox has been the coach here seven seasons now. What exactly would be "good enough" for you over a seven-year span?

Eight SBs of course! Don't say it's impossible to get 8 SBs in 7 years!!1111!

Seriously, I get where both sides are coming from. They did a good job rebuilding the offense last year so that it was actually carrying the team at times. Not bad for a defensive minded HC. No I don't think he is the best HC in the world, I have always thought he is avg. to good at best (And certainly good enough to win a SB with. Look at some of the HCs who have won SBs like Billick...MEH!)...but...let's see what happens this year with the defense. If we see marked improvement in the D as the year goes on instead of marked decline like last year and they win a playoff game or two, who wouldn't be willing to say that is enough to be happy with improvement wise? Sure the SB is a goal every year, rightfully so. Sure everyone is disappointed when that doesn't happen. But it isn't realistic.

What I try to look at is does a FO/staff learn from their past and improve the team or not? At a certain point, sure if the team isn't getting any better or consistently competitive (Naturally, all teams are going to have horrid years from time to time, at least Fox's worst ones are 7-9 not like Fisher's for example, who also has no SB ring, and only one SB appearance.) it's time to re-evaluate things and see if your franchise would be better off going another direction. And certainly if the HC is not being bought into by the core and important players anymore, it's time to move on. It's a tough tightrope to walk though whether you are at the point of probably taking a step back by starting over but better off in the long term or still on track with what you have. And of course some of it is who else is out there that it's realistic to get?

[Squirrel]

That is the point. Teams can have their first rounder this year and still have a 4 time probowler and only risk a future pick in 2010 and 2011. If that bring results people will feel that gambling future picks away was worth it. If it doesn't work, they will be gone when the draft picks are someone elses' problem.

Obviously the opposite would be true for us. If we trade peppers for future draft picks it will be because we are building for the future and Hurney and Fox are feeling secure about being here. By keeping Peppers and trading our first away for Brown we are suggesting that we are still all in and are needing to win this year.

If you can't easily see that, then it explains why you went to WVU

Actually I didnt go to college or is that collage.

Poorly written if you ask me (the article).

[panthers55]

I could tell you this much it wouldn't be good enough for a lot of other NFL cities/states in the country.

Other than 3 or 4 franchises, who has won more games than the Panthers? It is better than most NFL cities in the country. By design half of the teams will have a winning record and half will have a losing one.

Teams turn over coaches but still don't get results. Who has the best record in the division over the past 7 years? The Panthers.

How many teams in the NFC have won more games than the Panthers over the past 7 years? Philly and who else???

Bottom line is that the Panthers have been more successful than most teams since Fox got here. No reason to make changes when things are going pretty well.

[frash.exe]

What I try to look at is does a FO/staff learn form their past and improve the team or not? At a certain point, sure if the team isn't getting any better it's time to re-evaluate things and see if your franchise would be better off going another direction. And certainly if the HC is not being bought into by the core and important players anymore, it's time to move on. It's a tough tightrope to walk though whether you are at the point of probably taking a step back by starting over but better off in the long term or still on track with what you have. And of course some of it is who else is out there that it's realistic to get?

you said it better than I could've.

It may seem like peaches and cream now to a lot of people to, make the playoffs every other year and enjoy 7-9s in between, but at a certain point, this whole cycle is going to become routine, and our progress from where we started in 2002 will plateau, (if it hasn't already). That's the last thing I think ANYBODY wants is to just stop improving at some point, and as time goes by, more and more fans will grow impatient.

the fanbase hasn't evolved. Even Mangini gave two winning seasons out of three for the Jets and the organization grew tired of it and canned him after only three seasons. Mind you, they play in the same division as the AFC Juggernaut NE Patriots. It's hard to dethrone them, but they're still trying to find the answer, and whether or not you hold the Jets FO in high regard (because I don't really either) you have to say Mangini wasn't really the "genius" everybody thought of him as after his first campaign. I only bring them up as a somewhat relevant example because they've achieved as many playoff berths as we have and had 4 winning seasons in the same time-span as Fox.

[frash.exe]

Other than 3 or 4 franchises, who has won more games than the Panthers? It is better than most NFL cities in the country. By design half of the teams will have a winning record and half will have a losing one.

Teams turn over coaches but still don't get results. Who has the best record in the division over the past 7 years? The Panthers.

How many teams in the NFC have won more games than the Panthers over the past 7 years? Philly and who else???

Bottom line is that the Panthers have been more successful than most teams since Fox got here. No reason to make changes when things are going pretty well.

because the name of the game isn't how good your W/L record is over a specified time frame it's how deep into the playoffs you can go and how consistent you are at doing it. The ultimate goal here is to win the big one, and we can go 9-7 every year and maintain being a top 5 team in wins over whatever number of years you want to go by, but it isn't going to make you any better of a team any given year than other winning teams for that year.

[Fireball77]

RB-

I DESPISE Mangini, but I think he wasn't given a fair shot in NY, TBH (actually I really think he just isn't ready to be a HC and didn't from jump but I digress...). I believe he took the fall for extremely bad QB play down the entire home stretch of games last year being a big reason they didn't make the playoffs. Perhaps though he was the one who wanted Favre in the first place, IDK. So it's a good example because what I believe to be the main reason they didn't make the playoffs was not something the HC could really do anything about. I think they should have given him 2 more years.

You're right though, expectations are different in different cities. Usually they are higher when a franchise is a consistent contender. But look at the Colts for example. They were always contenders under Dungy but seldom did anything in the playoffs. Do I think they would have fired him by now even if he hadn't won a SB? Nope. Up until they won the SB in 2006 even there weren't many Colts fans I knew of who wanted him fired..and they had SPECTACULAR failures in the playoffs. Just humiliating because they were pretty much always the favored team...sometimes by double digits I think...and in stark contrast to the way they dominated their regular seasons every year. And in the two years since, nothing but playoff losses...not a single playoff victory.

[panthers55]

you said it better than I could've.

It may seem like peaches and cream now to a lot of people to, make the playoffs every other year and enjoy 7-9s in between, but at a certain point, this whole cycle is going to become routine, and our progress from where we started in 2002 will plateau, (if it hasn't already). That's the last thing I think ANYBODY wants is to just stop improving at some point, and as time goes by, more and more fans will grow impatient.

the fanbase hasn't evolved. Even Mangini gave two winning seasons out of three for the Jets and the organization grew tired of it and canned him after only three seasons. Mind you, they play in the same division as the AFC Juggernaut NE Patriots. It's hard to dethrone them, but they're still trying to find the answer, and whether or not you hold the Jets FO in high regard (because I don't really either) you have to say Mangini wasn't really the "genius" everybody thought of him as after his first campaign. I only bring them up as a somewhat relevant example because they've achieved as many playoff berths as we have and had 4 winning seasons in the same time-span as Fox.

I don't think anyone is happy with 7-9 seasons. Still if you take out the catastrophic injury seasons- Jake went down in 2007 and we had 13 starters on IR in 2004, Fox has had 1 losing season which was a 6 game improvement over 2001.

As for Mangini he was canned not primarily because of his overall record but the way in which they tanked last year and because he rubs people the wrong way. Guys like him have to win to justify putting up with him. When they don't, they get canned. Fox doesn't have that issue.

I do agree that each time we set the bar higher- first 12-4 season under Fox and only the second one in franchise history- expectations grow. After going 12-4 last year I don't think anyone will be okay with another 7-9 season. I figure unless we win the division there will be lots of grumbling. Especially if there aren't any special reasons to justify it.

[Delhommey]

Y'all are putting a lot of words in these pages.

[panthers55]

because the name of the game isn't how good your W/L record is over a specified time frame it's how deep into the playoffs you can go and how consistent you are at doing it. The ultimate goal here is to win the big one, and we can go 9-7 every year and maintain being a top 5 team in wins over whatever number of years you want to go by, but it isn't going to make you any better of a team any given year than other winning teams for that year.

The fact that Fox went to the Superbowl and to the NFC championship game twice is probably one big reason why he is still here. With the huge swan dive last year we didn't go deep in the playoffs like we had before. I would agree that a playoff berth and quick exit this year could do as much or more to hurt him than not making it at all. Look at how much heat Delhomme has taken for his playoff debacle. Don't think he will weather another one.

[panthers55]

Y'all are putting a lot of words in these pages.

How about if we put an abstract first so you don't have to read the whole thing:D.

[Delhommey]

Good call.

[crunkpanther]

because the name of the game isn't how good your W/L record is over a specified time frame it's how deep into the playoffs you can go and how consistent you are at doing it. The ultimate goal here is to win the big one, and we can go 9-7 every year and maintain being a top 5 team in wins over whatever number of years you want to go by, but it isn't going to make you any better of a team any given year than other winning teams for that year.

OK, you got a little closer to answering my question, I guess, but you still didn't answer it. Exactly what is "good enough" over a seven-year span? I don't care how you define it, but give me something.

You're the one who's saying what Fox has done isn't enough, so say what is good enough.