run-run-pass-punt

The Panthers (& Hornets) are always plugging one leak while another two are popping. It's just the way things usually are.

It won't happen, but the most hilarious thing that could happen in the NFL this season is for the NFC South champ to win the Super Bowl. It would be far more shocking than those 9-7 Giants' champs.

The average CLT sports fan (not likely anyone here) is trash - in terms of being supportive / fanatical. No judgment of the people intended, but it certainly doesn't build any buzz or electricity as a sports town. We're just, collectively, so bland and disinterested.

We're going to start a new trend in the NFL. We don't even *need* a QB.

I'm ready to run through a wall for him, and I'm as old as dirt.

Yeah, in the very early days. I agree. But once the novelty of being a professional sports city wore off, and the LJ, Zo, Mugsy, etc days faded away - along with Shinn's shenanigans, the passion just dwindled.

People endlessly talking "QB, QB, QB", and I get it. But this team is establishing a winning identity that is QB independent, and I LOVE it!

Charlotte, on the whole, has always been a fair-weather, soft, wine and cheese sporting culture. It's unlikely to change imho.

Given the overall context of his circumstances - Rhule's performance, QB situation, etc. - I'd say that he has done an 'incredible' job. Granted, that term, like virtually all others, has room for interpretation, but I don't see an argument against Wilks, if we're just considering the very apparent changes to team chemistry and performance, again, given what preceded his placement into the role. I'd be negotiating a long-term deal as soon as possible if I were in Tepper's shoes.

If ever there was an endorsement of the value of leadership, it's the change in tone from Rhule to Wilks in such a short time. I've gone from mixed / uncertain (initially) about retaining Wilks to definitely hoping it happens. I'll be disappointed if he isn't given a deal. Plus, I just like him as a human being, and I *LOVE* the type of football we play under him - that physical, wear-you-down, persistent feeling that just demoralizes.

He talks a good game oftentimes, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

They were clearly a paper tiger from the beginning. I know Bill Parcels loved to say you are what your record says you are, and while that's true practically speaking, your record is not always a reflection of the true quality of a team. The Giants were never going anywhere this year. Even if they get in the playoffs, they're no threat.

Kind of a side note, personally I would think about taking a couple QBs in the draft next year. Maybe one early and one mid to late round. You've got to keep buying those tickets until you hit the prize. Maybe use a trade back at some point to get an extra pick for the second QB pick.

Of course, I don't expect this to happen, but in the simmering cauldron of imagination, I ponder what it would be like if the Panthers win out or end up taking the division with an 8-9 record, Darnold suddenly finds "it" and the defense balls out. We go on a run and hoist the most unlikely of Lombardis. Wilks becomes a 20 year rock and legend at head coach, the talk of finding a franchise QB fades away, and we all live happily ever after.

Black has become so overplayed in the NFL, but fashion trends come and go. No biggie.

It's always about the totality of the team, and the leaders directing that collective. An elite QB makes things easier, of course, but it's not a prerequisite to winning. If you have many of the right pieces in place and competent QB play, you can still be a consistent winning team. Ideally, you want it all, but there's always holes on every NFL roster. It's about building the best group of 53 (55) and coaching staff / front office that you can on a rolling basis.

Great coaches get the most out of their players / team. You can succeed with a great coach and average QB. Give me the great coach all day every day.

Play the best football you can. Draft where you draft. Always striving to be the best you are capable is the way. Losing to (hypothetically) "win" is just losing.

Great players make great teams. The positions will always be what they are, and you try to fill them with the best players you can. But just because there is a void at a position - any position - doesn't mean you try to force it. Hope and need won't make players better than what they are.

I'd be up for him starting for 2 games (without telling him he's only getting 2) if only to secure the Baker trade as a 5th. Although I'm not sure how much more we have to hold him out. I guess it depends on how much we're passing as well. But, if you give him a couple games and he looks much better behind a better line, what have we got to lose? Honestly it doesn't matter much who we start, so why not give Darnold some game time.

I understand that view, but imho you've got to pull out all the stops to get a QB when you don't have one. Sam was/is still young, has all the physical tools, and was coming from a dysfunctional organization that may have sullied the true player underneath. I think it was a risk worth taking. When you make player decisions, you're not going to bat 1.000. You've got to make do with what's available and try to form a balanced and fully integrated team with parts that are possible to acquire. But, it's all water under the bridge, in any case.

I don't fault Fitt for the Sam trade. I mean if you don't have a QB, what are you supposed to do? You've got to turn over all the rocks and look in all the nooks and crannies until you get it solved. Maybe we could have paid less to get him, and I surely think it was a mistake to pick up the option, but there was enough justification to pull the trigger on acquiring him initially, especially given the dearth of options.

I always felt like Rivera's teams have a gritty toughness, even if they're not always "skilled" as some other teams. I know many wanted him gone, but as the saying goes - and as we found out - "be careful what you wish for". Hopefully we'll be able to sort out the head coaching spot with the right guy this time. I hate comparing ourselves to the Steelers because there's always been a bit of a "little brother" syndrome there, but it would be fantastic to have some long-term continuity like they've enjoyed, continuity that was possible because we're hiring quality coaches.

What?!? That's offensive.

I was opposed to drafting Fields - not because I didn't think he had talent (and obvious athleticism), but because sooner or later, you have to be able to win with your arm/vision/decision making at the QB position. And I didn't see that as being his strength. Of course, players can develop, and he's obviously trending upwards, but I feel like his passing potential is more a byproduct of his athleticism than a reflection of his natural skill-set as a passer. He's surely exciting to watch, and I've enjoyed seeing his play, but to be worthy of the label of "franchise" QB, you're going to face circumstances against the better teams (and in big games) where you'll need to be able to stand in the pocket, find the open man and hit the target - and do so with consistency. I don't see that in Fields, at least up until this point. I kind of hope he does blossom though, if only for the sake of Bears' fans and their perpetual struggle to find a worthy player at the position.