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!

     

Rivera Forbids Players From Talking About MNF

fieryprophet

By fieryprophet,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

fieryprophet Contributor

fieryprophet

Posted
Posted

http://espn.go.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/2284/want-to-discuss-mnf-game-not-here?ex_cid=espnapi_public

 

Whether it's how well LaFell and the receivers played or what players thought about the controversial no-call on the final play, Rivera doesn't want them discussing it. 

"No," he said. "It's over. ... If you lose focus of what's the next biggest game, and you go out and screw it up and lose, what you did those previous weeks no longer matters. We have to enjoy it for the amount of time we're allowed, and when we come in to start focusing on Miami, now it's time. 

"Now everything we talk about, everything we want to do, is all about Miami. We don't want to get ahead of ourselves and we don't want to look back."

 

Damn right, Riverboat! Keep that next game focus as razor-sharp as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the butch Newbie

the butch

Posted
Posted

Well, he better be talking about it with his defensive coordinators.  The Patriots, while initially getting blasted by our front line, marched the damn field on our soft, don't-let-it-get-behind-you defense.

 

That last drive was the EXACT set of circumstances that happened in Buffalo.  Soft defense.  PI by Kuechly.  Difference?  Home field and Robert Lester.  We were killed with it in one game, got lucky in the other.  With such a dominant game being played, I would like to see our defensive play calling improve when the other team has the ball to try and win it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheMaulClaw Mentor

TheMaulClaw

Posted
Posted

Well, he better be talking about it with his defensive coordinators.  The Patriots, while initially getting blasted by our front line, marched the damn field on our soft, don't-let-it-get-behind-you defense.

 

That last drive was the EXACT set of circumstances that happened in Buffalo.  Soft defense.  PI by Kuechly.  Difference?  Home field and Robert Lester.  We were killed with it in one game, got lucky in the other.  With such a dominant game being played, I would like to see our defensive play calling improve when the other team has the ball to try and win it.

II saw the "bend but don't break" philosophy  in the second half too.   After I thought about it however, I thought not having Charles Johnson out there probably was the reason why the coaches were forced to play more coverage.   But it worked.  They really played it the only way they could play it especially on that final drive.  If you play press coverage with two safeties deep against a 4/5 wr set there's going to be some deep space available for Brady to find.  They did a good job forcing Brady to manage that last drive different from what he wanted as a result despite 11 plays....their last play is on the 18.  It's not guaranteed but that's a pretty high closing percentage in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • MHS831
      Some homers' opinions of the OTs that we may realistically be able to get at 19

      By MHS831 · Posted

      You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1.  I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter.  So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate.  QBs are a great example.  Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith.  Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there?  Wharton (280lbs)?  So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover?  A deep free safety?  A quality center? A playmaking TE?  A DT to replace Robinson?  A wide receiver to balance the secondary?  Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right.  Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.  
    • strato
      Off-season topic: WWYD? Total Branding Redesign

      By strato · Posted

      Put Huey P Newton on the helmet. With his AK. 
    • csx
      Baldinger on the 2026 LB Class

      By csx · Posted

      We arent switching. Evero is 3-4 to the core. Given how 3-4 has been a noticeable characteristic of top defenses recently and we have drafted and signed players fir it  I dont know why anyone would think that's a good idea 
×
×
  • Create New...