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!

     

I think our secondary could be historically bad


CardiacCats

Recommended Posts

CB: James Dockery, Josh Thomas

SS: DJ Campbell

FS: Colin Jones

That was literally our lineup for the majority of the second Falcons game. We had them shutout for 40 minutes or something before going all prevent.

No need to worry that much about the secondary as long as Greg Hardy, Charles Johnson, Star Lotulelei, Dwan Edwards, Kawann Short, and Frank Alexander are on the field. Like Gettleman said.... hard for the opposing QB to throw the ball well if he's always getting knocked on his ass.

Edit: And IIRC, Hardy didn't play in the 2nd game. We still kept Brees and co in check until late in the game when we allowed 17 points in 4 minutes or something stupid because of prevent again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think any aspect of our defense will ever be historically bad with Ron Rivera as coach.

This...Rivera is going to have a front seven that will support the secondary we have available. I'm also pretty confident that the personnel we have will be better overall than what we sawlast year at times....historically bad? That's crazy talk.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasnt bad at the end of the season. It was only terrible when Naka was starting.

With our front 7 you could put my sister out there and we would be fine

Our secondary got absused last year and we got pressure.

Rookie DTs will be just that at first...and we already generated more pressure per snap I believe than any team last year.

Our secondary is a big issue. Pass rush helps a secondary. We had a pass rush last year....secondary was so bad that didn't matter. Slightly better DT play in 2013 in pass scenarios doesn't suddenly make a liability of a secondary not one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our secondary got absused last year and we got pressure.

Rookie DTs will be just that at first...and we already generated more pressure per snap I believe than any team last year.

Our secondary is a big issue. Pass rush helps a secondary. We had a pass rush last year....secondary was so bad that didn't matter. Slightly better DT play in 2013 in pass scenarios doesn't suddenly make a liability of a secondary not one

Our secondary fnished 12th in the league last year, and would have been higher if Naka didnt start all those games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our secondary fnished 12th in the league last year, and would have been higher if Naka didnt start all those games.

Those type rankings are flawed...we also sucked against the run and sucking at that make your pass D appear on paper better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many people are underestimating both Josh Thomas and D.J. Campbell. As well as how important the strong safety position is to the defense. We don't need an all-pro at SS, just someone who won't do what Nakamura did last year and give up big plays on a regular basis.

As for corner... Josh Thomas is poised for a breakout year, IMO. He looked very good at times last year and was almost always solid at least. We won't have an elite secondary, but it will be good enough with our front 7 to produce a potentially top-5 unit, IMO.

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...