Sgt Schultz

So much for "go Rams." We need a QB, but that is not the only thing we need. Sunday exposed that this roster needs to bulk up. On offense, we have not shown any ability to do anything other than try to do what the Steelers did to us, and that is punch the opposing defense in the mouth running the ball. In short, we aren't physical enough to out slug teams that want to run the ball down our throats, and we are not explosive (at all) on offense to win scoring-fests or force teams that want to run the ball down our throats away from that because of the scoreboard. Despite the rather flawed roster construction left behind by The Process, we have a few pieces but we have a lot of work to do if we are going to start winning against the upper-tier teams or teams that want to "take it to us until we stop it." All that said, we have a golden opportunity to empty the QB room of past mistakes and start fresh with the only seat being taken by Corral.

Our roster was designed by that brilliant architect, Matt Rhule. We've made some changes, but you are not going to transform a team that is physically built on the erroneous assumption that speed and athleticism matter more than bulk (especially in the lines) once the season starts. This was always going to be a slugfest. The Panthers can win a slugfest, as long as the team they are playing is not built for slugfests. For the most part, the AFCN and NFCN teams are built to slug it out. The Steelers committed to the run and stuck with it. We know what that does to opposing defenses over the course of a game. We couldn't run, the defense couldn't get off the field on third downs, and there was little we were going to do (successfully) to adjust. Whatever that little was we could do given our roster, McAdoo was not going to find it. If our coaching staff did not see this kind of game coming, then we have seen enough. In short, the Steelers out-executed, out-prepared, and out-coached us.

Fields is in a worse situation in terms of offensive talent around him than Cam was here throughout most of his career. In terms of our draft position, go Rams.

Once we fired The Process, anything beyond that is gravy! It is hard to have a bad season when you accomplish that.

I get it, and I'm in much the same boat. If we win, great. If we lose, where are we now in the draft order? The last time we know a team tried to tank was the 2019 Miami Dolphins. That effort got them the 5th overall draft pick, not the pot of gold people envision. It worked out for them, but they had their hearts set on bigger prizes. Asking professional athletes, who are playing for the next contract, to go out and "lose one for the Gipper" just doesn't work. They are going to do what they do, sometimes on instinct from years of training. The only way to get them to dial it back is to get them to not care anymore. To quit. Rhule may have accomplished that in the second half of last season. So, contrary to popular belief (mine included), he did accomplish one thing in the NFL.

I don't think Tepper is stupid. I do think he is naive to what works in the NFL, in maybe all facets. But, he relied on a guy who is clueless in the NFL when he hired a HC who was even more clueless about what it took to win in the NFL. Indications are that he recognizes all that, but we will see if he actually learned from it. Recognition is the first step, so it is not hopeless.

This is where I am, too @Jon Snow. I an on board with everything in the OP except that. Every now and then you go into a game, look at the two teams, and realize they both have the same path to victory. Yesterday was one of those games. Both teams have holes at QB which means they need to establish the run. Both teams need to be able to stop the run. Then it boils down to execution, turnovers (there were none), and a well-timed wrinkle or two. One team did both of the things needed to win. That same team also kept the chains moving. The only adjustment we could make on defense was to tighten up the coverage and try to take the easy third down conversions away. On offense, I don't think they have enough faith in Darnold (or PJ for that matter) to open things up and try to make the run more effective. Doing so might well have resulted in interceptions, which would have caused the game to get out of hand. Known weakness that we try to avoid every week, the Steelers just recognized it and are pretty good against the run so they were able to dare us to do it.....which we did not. The good news is that nobody on our remaining schedule is as good as the Steelers were against the run, but the map on what to do is drawn for even a dense coaching staff to see. The talent on this team did not instantly get better when The Process was sent packing. The roster has definite weaknesses. Wilks was able to wring more success out of this team than The Process could dream about, but there is a limit......not only on the roster, but in the coaching staff, too. That is the penalty for waiting too long to pull the trigger and winding up with some strange, hybrid, PushMePullYou team and coaching staff. Honestly, the results have been better than I expected. That doesn't mean I'm happy about where we are, just that I expected worse.

I'm not sure what people thought was going to happen. A few of us said going into this game that it was two 5-8 teams, both with QB issues and less than impressive passing games. The team that ran the ball effectively and stopped the run effectively won the game. With the exception of last week against the Ravens, the Steelers were good against the run. The Steelers were not even that impressive at running the ball (3.5 ypc) but they committed to it to the tune of 156 yards. We ran for 21 yards at , which is less in total than their longest run from scrimmage. The Steelers also converted 75% of their third downs, and we converted a bit over a third of ours. If you gave me those numbers before the game, I wouldn't have even asked to see the passing numbers. I would have told you the Steelers won, probably by more than they did. Despite all that, the difference in the score came down to red zone efficiency, where they were 3 for 3 and we were 1 for 3. It was always going to be an in-the-trenches battle, and they won those trenches. The only reason the score was not worse is that they are a 5-8 team. Well, 6-8 now. Our only saving grace, if anybody wants a silver lining, is a team of 5-8 quality is going to win the NFCS. Yeah, I know, the Bucs were 6-7, but that includes pulling out a couple of wins in the dying seconds against bad teams. It is not who wins the most in the next three, but who manages to lose the fewest.

Funny thing is the guy they called it on may have gotten by with it until his partner came in to wrap up the Viking that picked up the football. Dumb.

It's almost like the Colts best strategy at halftime, with a big lead, was to take Ryan out of the game. Their only hope was to see if his bad mojo applies when he is parked on the bench.

The Vikings may not be done yet. Or is it the Colts who may not be done yet?

That didn't take long.

Sure you can. Regardless of good call or bad call, he still threw his helmet. The official (if he is worth his salt) is probably going to give him the benefit of the doubt if all he is doing is screaming obscenities. But not throwing the helmet down. Suppose the unsportsmanlike penalty was for pushing the official. Are you going to say it is okay to do that just because the call was wrong? If you do, look out for what happens next. I get it, he's frustrated. That does not allow him to get a "get out of jail free card."

I saw that same article, and remembering the way Fields dropped I could not dismiss the possibility. This week will tell us a lot about where we can expect to draft. The Steelers have been awful, but up until last week they were good against the run. I think they were 5th in YPC rush defense. They sunk to 6th after the Ravens game, and they are middle of the pack in rushing yards allowed per game. I guess that makes sense because they have spent much of this year on the short end of the scoreboard with teams running at them as a result. That makes the YPC even more impressive, since they are doing it over the course of a lot of carries. All that means running the ball down their throats this week is not a given.

My first thought was "define long term deal." 2-3 years and something along the lines of what has already been hashed out here ($2.5-$3M per) seems good. But no Hurney specials, like 5-years, $35M with $25M guaranteed. Gawd, I hope we have put that kind of nonsense behind us.

I think you guys are in violent agreement. We have one QB who, for all intents and purposes, has not stepped foot on an NFL field. We definitely should be drafting one and looking for a FA journeyman to give us somebody that knows which end of a football points forward until Corral or the draft pick are ready......if they are. That means the FA could be an "old guy." What we don't need is a FA savior, unless they are truly a savior. And then they will probably cost too much to be available to us. I'm hoping the days of panning for gold and coming up with pyrite left the building with The Process.

If it worked, who cares if the opponent is afraid Darnold taking off with the ball. Regardless of their level of fear, they still could not stop the run. The goal is for it to work, not strike fear in the hearts of the opponent. Our OL gets the credit for that. Second, you are assuming anybody would be of Cam at this point. The RPO works a lot better when there is a legitimate threat of the ball being thrown downfield. Prior to 2018, that was Cam. Since, not so much.

If that is the case, why would we make the change? Having two guys on the roster that can't get the ball downfield (even if for very different reasons) when we finally need to is not a step up. Not to mention that the one we already have has been taking the practice reps, has a rapport with the center, etc. We are talking about bringing a guy in, just for the hellofit, who has not taken a snap all year, anywhere. I loved watching what Cam here did. What happened to him was excruciating to watch. But that does not mean we should try to bring him back (and my guess is he would not be interested) and upset whatever chemistry exists between Darnold, the OL, and his receivers just because it would be fun to watch him run in the red zone. Especially when our rushing game does not look like it needs a whole lot of help right now. IF we were going to bring somebody in, which is dubious at this point in the year, anyway, it needs to be somebody that can address a weakness, like the ability to get the ball to our receivers downfield, without getting the ball into the hands of DBs in the process of trying.

Exactly. He just tried and failed. Trent Dilfer is 1-0 in Superb Owls. He was 7-1 as a starter during the regular season and 4-0 in the playoffs. Yet the Ravens did not resign him the offseason after he got to touch the Lombardi Trophy. His participation in those games was that he didn't manage to screw that Owl up, but he tried (he threw a pick six in that Owl that was called back for a defensive penalty). If the king of not screwing up badly enough was not untouchable, neither is Darnold.

Can we lose the idea that if we run the table "Darnold went 6-0?" However many wins we post between now and the end of the year, it is quite possible Darnold's only role will have been to not do anything to sabotage those wins.

I think the job is Wilks' to lose, depending on the results down the stretch AND how he answers some questions in his interview. Those questions include who would be on his staff if he is the HC (could be names or descriptions), how he would prefer his offense to evolve, and what he sees as the positions of need. If his answers include that his preferred offense is something Buddy Ryan would be proud of and all his positions of need are on defense, then all bets are off. If the Panthers finish 2-2 or better down the stretch and don't embarrass themselves in the losses, not giving Wilks the job will be a tough sell. The guy took over a team that he had no choice in the roster of, no QBs who looked like NFL backups, let alone starters, no choice in who he inherited as coaches, and in general clusterf*#k mode and rolling 6-6 and making some substantive changes in both coaches and players despite his interim status is about the best anybody could have hoped for. I also think Tepper will be inclined to "shoot safe" after making himself look like a fool the first time around, not only with the pick but with the contract. There may have also been some gentleman's agreement with Wilks from day one, should The Process need to be terminated (or maybe it was when, not if). But, replacing Wilks with a guy who is similar to him is probably a non-starter. If he is going to be replaced (assuming we finish well), it better be with somebody good. I'm not saying I am for or against giving Wilks the job, but there are a lot of things rolling in his direction.

This takes us to another huge factor. What will the guy signing the checks do? He swung for the fences the first time and whiffed badly and looked like a fool. Granted, he had a lot off help going down that path by a guy who was a fool. Coaches aside, he has swung and missed a few times on various things. Does that make him more inclined to make a safe hire?

Could have easily been an "oh shite" moment by the people who wanted him hire, when they realized "their guy" was stinking the joint up. Cardinals dysfunction goes back to when they were located in St. Louis, and perhaps even before.

That would be THE interview question, frankly. "Tell me about the staff you would like to hire if you are the HC" If he realizes offense is not in his wheelhouse and he throws out a name or description (e.g. creative mind who tailors his philosophy to the talent on the roster) that addresses that, great. On the other hand, if he says something like Buddy Ryan was right, that offense only exists to give the defense a rest, then we call the next contestant. Hell, if he can accurately describe our positions of need on offense and provide some qualities he would like to have in the people who fill them, that puts him a step ahead of Rivera. Truth is, if we are interviewing offensive-minded coaches, the questions should be similar just pointed at the opposite side of the LOS.

But you don't understand, talking about running the football is just as good as actually running the football. You see, you convince your opponents you are going to run the ball down their throats, then you don't do it, outsmarting them. They would never expect that (especially since the QB room couldn't generate enough points through the air to hit the magic 17 point Mason/Dixon line. We'll fool 'em, even if they are right about our QBs! Or else. Trust The Process, or your not OOU. I agree with you on Wilks, and we are in the same place for the same reasons. I don't think he is ever going to devise a game plan that will miraculously overcome enormous odds and win a championship, but he is also not going to overlook the obvious, either.