Mage

“Pass as much as possible” NFL teams average 32 pass attempts a game. Dalton threw it 38 times, slightly above average but certainly not out of the norm and definitely not “as much as possible,” especially for a team that again gives up a lot of points. But I am sorry for expecting the thread-starter to have facts to defend their points.

How would running the ball more make our defense better on a per-play basis? All it would do is shorten the game and give us fewer possessions. The opposition is still going to score at the same rate. Maybe we only allow 28 PPG as opposed to 33 PPG, but then we're only scoring 17 PPG. It is the same thing. Again, this is why teams who are dead last in points allowed tend to not run the ball. It is maddening having to explain this to people on a football forum. Did running the ball a lot help the 2022 Bears, who went 3-14? Did it help the 2016 49ers, who went 2-14? They both ran the ball a lot and still gave up a lot of points. Why? Because running the ball more doesn't make your defense better. It isn't like the Panthers lost the time of possession to the Falcons by a wide margin. It was like a one minute difference.

Again, you can't even respond to a single one of my points. You can try and act smart all you want, but you know you are wrong. And if you think my post is about QB mobility, then your reading skills are about as strong as your football knowledge. The point is that if you don't have a mobile QB and you are giving up a lot of points, you will likely be in the bottom of the league in rush attempts. Again, unless you care to try and prove me wrong on that. But you know you can't.

Last point I'll make - the average team runs the ball about 27 times a game. So the Panthers only ran the ball 3 times fewer than the average team does, and this was in a game they lost by 18 points. But yeah, we "abandoned" the run.

'23 Commanders were last in points allowed. 32nd in rush attempts '22 Bears were last in points allowed. 2nd in rush attempts, but this is because they had Justin Fields. They were 32nd in pass attempts '21 Jets were last in points allowed. 32nd in rush attempts '20 Lions were last in points allowed. 30th in rush attempts '19 Dolphins were last in points allowed. 32nd in rush attempts '18 Raiders were last in points allowed. 23nd in rush attempts '17 Texans were last in points allowed. 11th in rush attempts '16 49ers were last in points allowed. 5th in rush attempts, but guess who their QB was? A mobile guy. Colin Kaepernick. '15 Saints were last in points allowed. 20th in rush attempts. '14 Raiders were last in points allowed. 32nd in rush attempts. Again, this is common sense stuff. When you are bottom in the league in points allowed, you tend to not run the ball a lot unless you have a running QB. Don't talk to me about "simple concepts" when you can't understand why a team who gave up 38 points didn't run the ball more than 24 times. The fact of the matter, which I have been consistent about saying throughout this thread, is expecting Hubbard to get 20+ carries a game is a ridiculous expectation when the defense is allowing 33 PPG. The Panthers are running the ball about as much as any team and coach in their situation would. And I can continue to go back decades and decades if you need more evidence to support that. But again, show me what you have that disapproves what I'm saying. That teams should run the ball regardless of the score or how their defense is performing. What data do you have to support that?

Example? You are just saying stuff without any supporting evidence. Anyone can do that. Outside of me mistakenly saying the Falcons had the lead the entire game, what other "facts" have I changed? Don't bother responding if you are just going to say stuff without anything to back it up, as I have done. And again... Hubbard had 18 carries. Why are we acting like that is an miniscule amount? And don't talk to me about "simple concepts". When you can't comprehend that teams who are dead last in points allowed tend to be near the bottom in rush attempts. Because... of course they are. It is hard to run the ball a lot without a mobile QB when you are giving up a lot of points. This is football 101. But again, feel free to prove me wrong with some data.

Lol. You can't even respond to any of the points I've been making. Nobody is changing any story. I misspoke. It happens. At the end of the day, the Panthers had a good run/pass split when the game was still even. It was only after the Falcons kept scoring every drive that the Panthers got away from it, and even then, they ran the ball 5 out of their first 6 plays to open the 4th quarter. How about actually respond to some of the points made? And personal bias? What are you talking about? Everything I've said has been based on facts. Teams who give up a lot of points don't run the ball a lot. Is this something you don't think is true? If so, then prove it. Give me some data that shows that teams across the league run at the same rate regardless of the score or the amount of points they allow. I'll be waiting. I already gave you a list of the top 10 rushing teams and how 6 of the 10 rank in the top 12 in points allowed, and 3 of the teams not in the top 12 have QBs who run on called drop-back passes. Care to refute any of that?

We ran the ball 5 times vs 2 passes on that drive. It is actually blowing my mind that you all are trying to use that drive as evidence of Canales not running the ball enough. On top of that, we were down by 8 points. It was not a guarantee we would tie the game and with the way the Falcons offense was moving, we couldn't afford to only run and keep wasting clock. After that INT we didn't get the ball back until 5 minutes left. And that was after a drive we had got cut short. If we kept running, very real chance we never get the ball back. It is like we're ignoring basic football logic and clock management.

Bro, just read your own posts and ask yourself if what you are saying makes sense. You are suggesting a drive where they ran more than they passed is evidence they abandoned the run? Seriously?

And guess what the Panthers did in the first half until end-of-1st half drive when they had to throw? Ran the ball 13 times vs 17 passes. Gee, almost like the Panthers would have a more even run/pass split if the games were closer. Gee, almost like it is hard to keep running the ball when the other team scores 30 points. Who would have thought?

At this point I have to assume you are intentionally being ignorant. Falcons passed a lot against the Bucs because they had to. It was a high-scoring game, Bucs had 24 points by halftime. They ran the ball a lot against us because they had the lead for the whole game. Again, this is basic football common sense. You have lead = you run ball. You don't have lead or are in a high-scoring game = you pass ball. If the Panthers had a lead, they would run the ball more. You know, like when they ran the ball 31 times against the Raiders. But we can't do that because we generally don't have the lead. But again... I shouldn't even need to be explaining this.

And what happened to your argument that they abandoned the run in the 4th quarter? Care to explain how you came to that conclusion?

BECAUSE WE ARE GIVING UP 33 POINTS PER GAME. It can't be that hard to see why a team routinely giving up 20+ points in the first half isn't in a position to run the ball 30+ times a game. This is just common sense that a 10 year old football fan would know. You can't be a top-10 team in rush attempts giving up 30+ points a game unless you also have a QB who runs a lot on drop back passes. Top 10 Teams in Rushing: Ravens - 24th in points allowed (helps they have a QB who also runs a lot) Steelers - 2nd in points allowed Packers - 9th in points allowed (+ the weeks they had Malik Willis) 49ers - 12th in points allowed Commanders - 22nd in points allowed (see Ravens) Saints - 23rd in points allowed Bills - 11th in points allowed Bears - 5th in points allowed Lions - 8th in points allowed Cardinals - 27th in points allowed (see Ravens and Commanders) Gee, who would have guessed the teams who run the ball the most either have mobile QBs who help inflate the numbers or play good defense? Saints are the one exception on the list, but the 51-points they allowed is skewing the numbers. And guess how many times they ran the ball that game? 21 times. Because, shocker, teams who give up a lot of points tend to not run the ball. It isn't a Dave Canales thing. It is a football logic thing.

I wasn't even going to entertain the rest of your post because quite frankly, you are so wrong, but I had to respond to this. You are telling me to go look at the play calls? How about you take your own advice. The Panthers opened the 4th quarter up with 5 runs in their first 6 plays. They didn't "abandon" it. After that drive, they didn't get the ball back until 5 minutes left in the 4th with the score 20-35. Again, some of you are just reaching for something to blame, logic be damned. When you give up 30+ points per game, there is only so much you can run the football. This is a fact. Why are we even debating this? It is common sense.

This is crazy talk. The NFL's leading rusher only averages 19 per game. 18 carries is not "too light" when you are giving up 33 PPG. This shouldn't even be a discussion.

What? Hubbard is literally 10th in the NFL in carries and that is despite only getting 16 carries the first 2 weeks because of how terrible Bryce Young was. He's averaging 17.5 carries his last 4 games. For comparison, the NFL's leading rusher Derrick Henry averages 19.8 carries per game. Barkley averages 18.5. And those two play on way better teams than us, teams that can actually afford to run the ball at the end of games. Some of you are just reaching for anything you can think of to blame. This is 2024. Teams aren't gonna give a dude 20 carries every single week. And what, do you want them to run Miles Sanders more? Is that REALLY what is going to turn things around?

Okay.... and this disapproves what I am saying how exactly? They had the lead for the majority of the game. Thus they ran the ball more than the team who didn't have the lead. I'm not trying to be disrespectful but you have been watching football for a long time, right? In your experience, how often does the team without the lead out-run the team with the lead? How often does the team dead last in points allowed run the ball more than the other team? How often does a team give up 20+ points in the first half and keep running the ball in the second? It just isn't a thing. You act like the Panthers just abandoned the run completely. Again, Hubbard had 18 carries. That is not a small amount, especially when you lost the game by 18 points. He's 10th in the NFL in carries. Like seriously, what do you want? For him to get 30+ carries a game while the other team clears 30 points? If you want to criticize Canales, feel free. But acting like his approach to the run/pass divide is unusual just isn't correct. Panthers problems have nothing to do with them "not running the ball enough". The simple fact of the matter is when you have the worst defense in the NFL, there is only so much you can run the ball. This is just a fact.

Yeah because they had the lead. Teams who do not have the lead do not run 38 times in a game. They just don't. We ran the ball as much as any HC would without having the lead.

We are on pace for a -283 point differential, which would be the 2nd worst all-time. The only team ahead would be the expansion 1976 Bucs "We're not far away" lol. I'm not trying to be overly negative but this team is so far away it ain't even funny.

I mean, Hubbard ran the ball 18 times. Sanders had 3 carries. It isn't like we didn't try to run the ball. There is just only so much you can run when your defense lets the other team do whatever they want. Running the ball more isn't going to make the other teams offense any less effective. Not against this defense.

There is no such thing as "controlling the pace" when you are giving up 21+ points in the first half every week. This situation isn't comparable to what Wilks dealt with in the slightest.

Gave up 38 points today, 22 in the first half This defense is SPECIAL

FEED HUBBARD

Panthers are going to get blitzkrieg'd

Panthers suck