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!

     

Why We Lost

Catalyst

By Catalyst,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Catalyst Newbie

Catalyst

Posted
Posted

A lot of blame going around right now, but when it comes right down to it the reason we lost this game is pretty simple: the 49ers are a better team than we are.

 

What I mean by that is they have more talent. Kap is not a better QB than Cam, but he does have an infinitely better OL & more weapons to work with. That was essentially the difference in this game.

 

Someone said before the game that even if we lost this wasn't another Arizona disaster and I agree. We're in the early phases of being one of the league's top teams, but to take that next step we will have to make some tough choices and put some better talent around Cam.

 

This includes letting Greg Hardy go. No, not for nothing like we did with Peppers (thanks, Marty) but franchise him and trade him for a 1st round pick the way the Chiefs did Jared Allen several years back when they sent him to Minnesota. Plenty of teams will be clamoring to add an elite pass rusher and, frankly, we'd be better served spending that money - and the pick we'll get - on upgrading the offense.

 

I don't know about anyone else, but personally I thought Cam played a hell of a game all things considered. With no running game and a mediocre WR corp. he made throw after throw against one of the league's best defenses. In the end, they were able to stop us because, as I said, the talent just isn't there and because the defense had a bad 2nd half. Next season it'll have to be different if we plan on returning to the playoffs and doing some damage.

 

It's time for some of that old Gettlemagic because with a good, well thought out plan this offseason we could be scary good in 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shufdog Community Regular

Shufdog

Posted
Posted

Two missed opprotunities at the goal line would have put us in position to shoot for a game winning field goal at the end.

Not that we would have pulled off the kick, just saying that those two goal line failures are what I would point to as why we lost.

 

I was going to post the same thing. If we could have got in the end zone on those two opportunities i think it would have changed the whole game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davos Grand Master

davos

Posted
Posted

We got outplayed in most aspects that second half and let the ref situation in the 1st half deflate us.   Poor play calling again, bad 3rd down D when the refs didn't help SF, and just a clear lack of weapons.  

 

The main focus this offseason is building a potent offense around Cam and Gettleman has a lot of sorting out to do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ItsNotGonnaBeAlright Newbie

ItsNotGonnaBeAlright

Posted
Posted

I was going to post the same thing. If we could have got in the end zone on those two opportunities i think it would have changed the whole game!

Get seven points on fourth and goal, then seven instead of three on third and goal. That's eleven points that got left on the field. Get the ball with a minute to go, make a pass to get in range, and make the field goal, now we're at fourteen points. Change nothing else and the final score is 24-23.

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

    • PNW_PantherMan
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • tukafan21
      Wild Idea.. Trade for Shemar Stewart

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • Dave Gettleman's Shorts
      TIME TO SPECULATE

      By Dave Gettleman's Shorts · Posted

      adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...