According to FootballOutsiders, Panthers Offense 9th Best in Week 1

[CatMan72]

Anyone who has watched the All-22 tape can verify how big of a load of poo this is. There were receivers getting deep on their Corners and Shula never made the adjustment to attack it. Cam may have missed the read, but it's also up to Shula to point it out and go after it again.  I can't tell you how many times Seattle put 9 in the box with a single high safety and we just ran right into it.  That's absolutely asinine....

 

So if receivers were getting open deep Shula's game plan must have been pretty good, right? 

 

I don't know if you understand how football works, but the OC calls the plays and it's the QB's job to execute them... there are almost always a combination of deep, intermediate and short routes and it's up to the QB to decide who to throw the ball to. Each play has a primary receiver in mind and given the choice I'm sure both Cam and Shula would prefer to throw the ball as deep as possible, but the ultimate decision on where to throw the ball comes down to how the play unfolds. 

 

With this in mind, go back and watch the tape... what kind of situation was Cam in most of the time when those receivers got open deep? 

 

A classic example is the ball he threw to Smitty that Sherman nearly picked off... LaFell got open deep, the only problem is that Bennett had beaten Bell's block and he was ready to violate Cam. If Cam had tried reset his feet to throw back to the left side of the field and hit LaFell he would have been A) crushed by Bennett and B) probably made a bad throw as a result of being crushed by Bennett which could have very easily led to an interception by the talented Seattle secondary who was quite purposely playing in deep zone coverage most of the game waiting for this scenario to unfold. The book on Cam is that he gets frustrated and tries to force the ball deep into coverage, so it was no coincidence that Seattle was playing so much deep zone against him. 

 

Instead, he opted to throw the ball to his best receiver on a short crossing route who at that moment had Sherman beat. Cam ended up sailing the ball a little bit because Bennett was at his feet and Bell was in the throwing lane and Sherman made a hell of a play on the ball (because he's pretty good) but that was the best decision given the circumstances. 

 

You can call up plays to run all the deep routes you want and you can have receivers WIDE open on those routes, but if the o-line is being beaten as badly on their blocks as they were most of the day it doesn't matter... Cam found himself in situations where he had to unload the ball much earlier then he wanted to based on the pressure he was getting and what the defense was giving him in coverage. 

 

I need to go back and check the claim that we were running frequently against a 9 man box. 

[Growl]

7 points.

[Growl]

There, now we changed it up a bit.

[MuMouey]

So if receivers were getting open deep Shula's game plan must have been pretty good, right?

I don't know if you understand how football works, but the OC calls the plays and it's the QB's job to execute them... there are almost always a combination of deep, intermediate and short routes and it's up to the QB to decide who to throw the ball to. Each play has a primary receiver in mind and given the choice I'm sure both Cam and Shula would prefer to throw the ball as deep as possible, but the ultimate decision on where to throw the ball comes down to how the play unfolds.

With this in mind, go back and watch the tape... what kind of situation was Cam in most of the time when those receivers got open deep?

A classic example is the ball he threw to Smitty that Sherman nearly picked off... LaFell got open deep, the only problem is that Bennett had beaten Bell's block and he was ready to violate Cam. If Cam had tried reset his feet to throw back to the left side of the field and hit LaFell he would have been A) crushed by Bennett and B) probably made a bad throw as a result of being crushed by Bennett which could have very easily led to an interception by the talented Seattle secondary who was quite purposely playing in deep zone coverage most of the game waiting for this scenario to unfold.

Instead, he opted to throw the ball to his best receiver on a short crossing route who at that moment had Sherman beat. Cam ended up sailing the ball a little bit because Bennett was at his feet and Bell was in the throwing lane and Sherman made a hell of a play on the ball (because he's pretty good) but that was the best decision given the circumstances.

You can call up plays to run all the deep routes you want and you can have receivers WIDE open on those routes, but if the o-line is being beaten as badly on their blocks as they were most of the day it doesn't matter... Cam found himself in situations where he had to unload the ball much earlier then he wanted to based on the pressure he was getting and what the defense was giving him in coverage.

I need to go back and check the claim that we were running frequently against a 9 man box.

Amazing post, but you have to realize who you're dealing with now. There are no intelligent people who think the play calling was the problem. We all watched the game. Olsen had great throws he dropped, DWill had holes and lanes he didnt hit/or see and that killed drives. All you have now are wanna-be coaches talking about how we only had 125 yards passing, then u say "u think if Olsen held on to the ball, or Cam saw Lafell (on the play u referred to), we would have more yards and longer drives?" Then they disappear and have nothing to say. You are correct and all the people who know football, agree

[panther4life]

Because Seattle didn't drop the ball too.

If your game plan requires the offense to make zero mistakes, it is not a good game plan.

Our TD drive was extended when Williams fumble fortunately rolled out of bounds. Our last drive was extended when fortunately Seattle's D Line put their hands on Cam's facemask. Shula's game plan got as many good breaks as bad (this is being dutifully ignored of course), and still failed to produce more than the measly 13 points needed to win the game.

 

It's just insane to pin the loss on 1 guys shoulders. He did not make any egregious calls that cost us the game. I am not singling out Deangelo for fumbling it. I am not singling out Olsen for his drops. I am not singling out Cam for locking onto receivers.

 

So why do you or anyone else insist on singling out Shula?

 

Those coming to his defense( including myself are saying hey its not on one guy). I named several plays/ penalties that cost us the game. Their was several different culprits. No one guy lost us that game and to think that they did is a plain lazy analysis.

[mav1234]

5) plus you will never get a rational response or answer out of any of them because they speak in only hyperboles, theories, and exagerations

 

...this coming from someone that just made a list of 5 things up, with half of them being things virtually nobody actually unhappy with the performance of our offense even says

[beastson]

Lol at this whole thing

[CatMan72]

Go to Panthers.com... they just posted an article where Smitty said the Seahawks players were complimenting us immediately after the game on the route combinations we were using because it was messing them up.

[frash.exe]

Reading Zod type "7 points" over and over again is mind numbing.

 

When points are the final say in whether you win or lose, yea, it's pretty damn prevalent

 

Unironically many people are downplaying that because they've gotten so used to rationalizing failure

[cranky]

Points only tell you if you win or lose - they don't always tell you who the better team was. FO simply tells you who did good or bad based upon who they played. They just look at the numbers and say team 1 played better than team 2. Simple as that.

[Yaboychris28]

if we put Cam in the Shotgun more this week and utilize his talents more effectively our offense will look be fine imo