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!

     

Our passing down D-Line


Zod

Recommended Posts

Yes very dynamic and on paper even better than 2003 Panthers' D line. The main sub back then for passing downs was just to bring in Al Wallace, right?

 

I was going to agree with you but then i watched this..

 

our current roster might be good on paper, but until they put it the results- they are just another good D-line

we haven't even seen our 2 rookie DTs play yet and we a crowning them better than 2003 D-line???

 

we go to the NFCCG and beyond- then we can have a discussion about them being better..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people forget how nasty and dominant our front 4 was in 2003. 

 

 

Very true, but I believe this year's D-Line has the potential to be just as good.

 

The bad news is we could hide the deficiencies more in the secondary b/c the DB's were allowed a lot more contact in 2003 than they will be in 2013.  I remember many receivers that year (Marvin Harrison, Tory Holt, Eagles no-name group) complaining about how rough the Panthers DB's were (and not flagged).  But anyway, it was good coaching b/c it worked.  Ricky Manning Jr, would have never made the impact he did with his playing style into today's game.

 

I personally don't see our secondary today as much worse.  Really, outside of Deon Grant, no secondary player from that team had a lasting impact in the league.  But I think they have the possibility to get exposed a lot more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Superbowl?

 

Look our secondary is still mediocre and we have rookies starting. We could be badass but we could also still be rebuilding for yet another year.

 

Yeah but who played CB for us in 2003? Reggie Howard and Ricky Manning? We had guys like Ken Lucas and Chris Gamble in for years and did nothing with them. We will struggle in the secondary, but we don't need 11 pro bowlers to make the playoffs. We beat the Saints, Falcons, and Raiders by beating the poo out of their QBs. If we can keep a nasty rotation going our opponents will fear us.

 

"Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." -Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point Star and Short could be the new McClain and Fua, or Sapp and Ngata. We really have no idea. I don't think Edwards is as good as a lot of fans seem to think. Hopefully our DTs will pan out and we can have a very good defense for the first time in years. 

 

I just want some aspect of this team to be exceptional. Defense, offense, special teams, just give me something. Right now it seems to me that the defense on paper might have the right pieces to be very good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's not impossible to go from worst to first.  We kept Evero because anyone in there right mind knew our defense was destroyed by injuries, not the scheme.  Evero has been given a plethora of talent between free agency and the draft, not to mention getting DB back. I fully expect our defense to be very good.  I have no reason to think Jones would say something like that unless he truly felt like that.   
    • We would’ve played Florida and lost in the 1st instead of the 3rd round.  Montreal would have been the 8 seed.
    • I can't get behind a purely subjective re-draft as a method of defining "top-10 QB" status. That invites bias based on vibes/hypotheticals and can ignore actual on-field performance. You and others have said that Bryce has to be a top-10 QB to justify the pick. That's a high bar, which I'm not against, but we need a clear, consistent way to measure it. When I bring up metrics that Bryce has registered in the top-10 in like BTT%, P2S ratio, catchable deep ball rate, etc... they're waved off as either irrelevant or the expected baseline performance. Meanwhile, volume stats like passing yards or win-loss records, both of which depend heavily on roster talent, health, and coaching, are treated as definitive. That's where the inconsistency kicks in. If no performance metric ever counts in his favor and the answer is always going to be "he should be doing that," then we're not evaluating him... we're just holding him to a curve he can't win against. If this is really about performance standards, then let's define them. But if it's just about confirming prior takes based on height and weight, then let's call it what is it and stop pretending that this is a football analysis discussion.
×
×
  • Create New...