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!

     

G-man setting Chico up is preposterous. Please, Stop!


top dawg

Recommended Posts

More than a few people are still proclaiming that Gettleman is basically putting Rivera in a position to fail (in so many words). Why would he do that? Basically, you're calling the man a liar. G-man doesn't strike me as a bullshitter in any shape, form or fashion. He wants Rivera to succeed, and obviously has made moves to strengthen the team overall---hopefully on the field and on the spreadsheets, and, arguably, there hasn't even been any appreciable loss in terms of bottom line results and quality of play on the field. G-man has given Rivera more pieces to succeed. There is more depth in the defensive backfield and at WR, plus the return game just got a shot in the arm, and we added a starting level, Super Bowl champion, at LB. I don't know how that equates to setting Rivera up. Gettleman is going to do exactly what most Panthers fans should probably be doing, and that's having an open mind, being objective, and letting the season play itself out before drawing conclusions.

Furthermore, for the immediate future, Rivera is J-Rich's guy. Why would J-Rich bring back Chico, and basically force Rivera on Gettleman for the immediate future, only to allow Gettleman to leave Ron's ass hanging out there in the wind? That's not productive. It would literally be a waste of time for all parties involved from the FO to coaches, players, and even fans. Is it an endorsement? No.

But it is obviously a gamble, not only with time, but with the Charlotte and the surrounding area's good will, and Panthers fans' support. Like I said, it's not an endorsement, but short term investment. You think Richardson would let G-man just come in and fug everything up because G-man wants to (in order to get his own guy)? It makes no sense whatsoever----professionally, or personally. There is no Machiavellian plot or acceptable lame duck status on any level to G-man's approach as it pertains to Rivera's status this coming season. To suggest anything to the contrary is just being analytically lazy, or more concerned with being dramatic and/or sarcastic than realistic.

G-Man has made moves to improve the team for the immediate future, which is exactly what's necessary to give Rivera more than a puncher's chance (G-man's term) to succeed. Let's hope that Rivera comes through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest I like how the team finished last year and the two guys we cut James Anderson and Chris Gamble did not play down the stretch.... So to if you really think about it, G-Man has not dismantle the team, he pretty much has added to it......

Now I would like to see him bring in Alan Branch and maybe some more OL depth.... But for the most part, I really feel good about G-Man and Ron Rivera going into the season.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry Richardson properly identified the problem in Charlotte. Marty Hurney was horrible, as we all know. He thought we could get by with Practice Squad players at important positions and poured tons of money into positions that are easy to fill.

In addition, aside from RB, we had no depth.

Rivera was not a good game manager--he had a young staff and he needed help, I guess. However, the lack of talent took away options. He could not pull Norman out and replace him vs. the Bears. Marty gave him a special teamer to play at S, something I am sure the Atlanta staff knew too well. What could he do? Put Martin in? Remember when he got burned vs. New Orleans in week 17 the week before?What could he do when his scrub DTs were getting blown back vs. Tampa Bay?

Ron simply did not have options, so we really do not know how good he could be yet. Sure, his game management is not good yet--neither is Bill Billichek's game management. He has players--depth and balanced talent. That is the difference.

Gettlemen is working right now to give Rivera some depth--options. Variations of talents and skills.

I am NOT comparing Ron Rivera to Billichek, but if you think Rivera lost 9 games last year, you are wrong. He never played. Without Brady, New England is average and Billichek has no rings. To his credit, however, he recognized Brady's talent and added him to the roster when everyone thought Bledsoe was the man in NE. This move gave BB options, and you know the rest of the story.

Gettlemen is giving Ron options. If he makes the wrong decisions, he will be fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is a difference between

1. setting someone up to fail

2. carefully planning so you don't dig yourself into a bigger mess b/c you likely could fire your coach and have to do a 180 the next year

3. and being all in with a coach

Gettlemen is doing 2. He isn't going to do anything that doesn't also put him in position to completely start fresh with a new coach after this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if I have this correct, you are saying that Gettlemen is doing just enough to make it look like he is helping Rivera. When in all actuality, he is just waiting for Ron to fail, so Ron can be fired.

No big signings because Gettlemen is saving his prized resources for the coach he actually wants.

So, while playing hotsy totsy with the bottom of the roster looks good and all. It is all just a smokescreen covering up for a hidden agenda by Gettlemen. To not help Rivera so he fails, gets canned, and a new better/improved coach can be hired.

If that is correct? You go boy. Cuz that one is out there.

Who knows, Gettlemen may have his own guy in mind. But until Ron Fs up, Ron will be here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The bottom line is we saw long stretches this season where T-Mac wasn't even targeted.  He had games where he went an entire half without seeing a pass thrown his way, and it lead to a bunch of games with 5 or less targets.  If he's healthy and we're not up a stupid amount and only running the ball, I can't see him having more than a game or two next year with 5 or less targets. We were also only 22nd this year in pass attempts, and that was with a rookie #1 and no legitimate 2nd option for half the season.  And even then, we were only 46 pass attempts above 31st place. If we go into next season with T-Mac improved in his 2nd season and a healthy Coker for 17 games, there is absolutely no reason for us to not throw it more.  That right away increases both of their target totals without sacrificing any targets from each other or other players, add in them taking targets from the TEs and RBs on top of that, and your argument just doesn't hold water anymore. You can't look at targets/yards in a vacuum and think next year Coker just takes some from T-Mac.  You have to look at the team as a whole and our situations this year and then project what will happen next year. If he's healthy for 17 games, I'd bet my life savings that T-Mac sees increases across the board, targets/catches/yards/TDs.   Just as Coker will also see career highs in all categories, it's not one vs the other, it's shifting offensive strategy given our personnel, which next year will be much better for our passing game (QB issues aside).
    • C'mon now.... First, you can't switch up your argument once someone points out a major flaw in your point. You're saying we shouldn't expect a big increase in targets/yards for T-Mac, but then shift to talking about averages with Chase when I point out the significant leap he took there once you factor in his missing games.  He saw an increase in targets in 5 less games, averages aside, he saw a significant increase in targets in his 2nd season, what he then did with those targets is actually irrelevant in this discussion. Puka seeing no increase is pointless, as he saw such an absurd amount of targets for a rookie, it's near impossible to see an increase. But the real issue in this post is that you think I'm proving your point by showing how Waddle had to share targets with Hill. Tyreek Hill was a 1st team All Pro who was 2nd in the NFL in yards that season. If you think Jaylen Waddle sharing targets with a 1st team All Pro and a future HOFer is even remotely in the same category as T-Mac needing to share targets with Coker... then you are certifiably insane, lol. If anything, you could make the argument that Coker is to Waddle as T-Mac is to Hill in that discussion (which would then lead to a serious increase in targets/yards for T-Mac).  But even that is insane, as neither T-Mac or Coker will be as good as Hill and Waddle respectively that season.  I love both of their potential, but c'mon now, T-Mac isn't getting 119 catches for 1,700 yards and Coker isn't getting 117 for 1,350 next season.
×
×
  • Create New...