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!

     

For all complaining about Rivera's record in close games...


Gabeking

Recommended Posts

Found this interesting quote/stat from a commenter on an inferior site:

Chuck Noll's record early on was 12-30 in his first three season and he was 3-11 in games decided

by one score or less. He turned out “okay.”

Bill Walsh was 8-24 and had a record of 4-13 in games decided by one score or less and he turned out “alright.”

Plenty of other good examples.

I'll admit I was on the fire Rivera bandwagon for the poor records in close games(among other things) for quite some time, and I know there will be absolutely nothing anyone can do to convince the naysayers for quite some time. But IMO, after giving some thought, I think one more year (paired with the right GM, of course) was not the horrific decision than most huddlers make it out to be. Of course Rivera needs to improve on a few things, and I would list those necessary improvements if I wasn't so beat.. And I also think the progress we made at the end of this year was different and much more positive than the progress we made at the end of the year prior. I'll agree we need some significant changes on the offensive staff, as well as a GM who isn't Beane, but I think one last shot for Rivera to prove his worth isn't as bad as most think.

DISCLAIMER: In NO WAY do I think Rivera is a Bill Walsh or a Noll(he could be worse than Steve spurrier next year, for all I know), well obviously not yet at least, but it's an interesting stat nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if rivera learns to manage the clock better and further develops the coaching prowess we saw in the last eight games, there's no reason he shouldn't be able to keep up his end of the team's responsibilities and win some football games for us next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im just fuging sick of burning timeouts in the 1st/3rd quarter and having none when we need them at the end of game.

That HAS to stop.

Ill agree with that.. Like I said he has things to work on, but you can't deny the progress, especially in the defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always found that particular take a little silly.

Would people have felt better about him if our losses were all blowouts? At least we came close to winning.

I think it's just the fact that there were so many heart breakers and games we really should've won but didn't it got most people riled up and angry at those games instead of the games we really should've been more upset about (the giants game, for example)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im just fuging sick of burning timeouts in the 1st/3rd quarter and having none when we need them at the end of game.

That HAS to stop.

Well, that and all those times he DOESN'T use the timeouts even when we're trying to drive at the end of a half for a scoring opportunity. The taking 2 or 3 timeouts into the half with him annoys me more than burning a timeout early to make sure something bad doesn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's just the fact that there were so many heart breakers and games we really should've won but didn't it got most people riled up and angry at those games instead of the games we really should've been more upset about (the giants game, for example)

I've lost close games as both a player and a coach. It sucks, but I always reminded myself afterward that we played well enough to at least have the chance to win, and that was a good thing.

It's also not like every single one of the close losses happened because of coaching. More than one of them definitely owed more to player execution.

But with that said, I'm sure the crowd that's grumbling about all this will continue to parrot that stat line as if it really means something damning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Today, we are all Kucci... I miss our feral Russian attack goalie!
    • That was a good segment. Watched every minute of it and would highly recommend it to all fans.
    • "So much of what the Panthers are going to do next week isn't dictated by their preference, but by what happens above them. That's another benefit of not getting locked into need. For instance, if you're thinking you want a receiver, seeing five or six of them go off the board and reacting by taking the sixth or seventh off your list instead of the first (or second or third) something else isn't necessarily wise." https://www.panthers.com/news/ask-the-old-guy-back-into-the-weeds-of-the-nfl-draft-bryce-young-charlotte-hornets-mock-draft This is what some don't seem to get, I don't care how many times it is said: You're NOT going to draft an inferior person at one position, just because that position is perceived as, or is in fact, a bigger need. That would basically nullify, or at least lessen, the reason why you set yourself up via free agency to be able to take the BPA/BAP on the board in the first place.  Yes, the process is complex, very much involved and ongoing, but the overall philosophy is not rocket science. You set yourself up in order not to be pigeonholed into taking a lower graded player at the expense of a higher graded one. This is why Morgan, Gantt and countless of others say the same thing. This is why it's just nonsensical to set yourself in a position where you don't have to, but then act like you have to come hell or high water: "Oh, we have to draft [whatever position], and we can't draft [this position]."  I'm good with whatever they do, until proven otherwise, but even then, you have to be mature enough to know that drafting is an imperfect exercise, filled with hits and misses. And, you generally don't know if you've hit, and especially missed, right away. Moreover, like I've said before, sometimes two players--different positions or not--can both be hits on their respective teams, so in that sense, it's not purely about a right or wrong pick as much as it's about putting puzzle pieces together at the time the best way that you know how.  At the end of the day, people are going to believe what they want to believe, but one thing that's true is that what the Panthers do regarding the draft is dependent upon what others do, and what others do can and does change things. That being the case, it's just another reason why you can't go in with tunnel vision. The thought of doing that is preposterous.
×
×
  • Create New...