Why drafting a RB or defense won't solve our issues.

[CoastalCat]

I believe it was John Lynch or one of those fox broadcasters who said it best last year, when we are forced into passing situations and the opposing defense knows we need to pass it our offense becomes completely incompetent.

 

Don't quote me one this but when a team gets a two TD lead on us I believe our record is like 1-20, so either we need to have the lead or we're screwed.

 

If it was up to me I would draft receiver, o-line, receiver with the first 3 picks, get Cam's so weapons to see if can become an elite passer. Cause as it stands right now the receiving corp is still among the worst in the NFL and we don't what we are getting Oher and Martin.

 

Went 12-4 with very similar players on offence (and way better players on defense) by allowed the 2nd fewest points in the league. I think the gunslinging team that you're looking for is the Denver Broncos. 

 

Also, 1-20 after being down by two TD's seems like a population statistic, i.e. I would think most teams are 1-20 when down by two TD's. That's like someone saying that white cars cause 51% of car accidents (like white cars cause accidents), but then also mentioning that 51% of cars on the road are white. 

 

Can anyone run down the stats on this? 

[rmoneyg35]

Why are we talking about Cam being BPA? 1st of all Gettleman was not the GM and Hurney was. Hurney didn't go by BPA. That draft had many players that could of gone #1 including Marcell Darius, Patrick Peterson, AJ Green, Nick Fairley, Blaine Gabbert and I even seen Da'Quan Bowers mocked to #1. The problem is we really needed a QB and Cam was the best of the draft. You could argue that we should of drafted someone else but we needed a QB and QB is the most important player on the team. We were also rebuilding with a new Coach and basically new team. When you rebuild you usually start with a QB.

[pantherclaw]

I love this.

Most fans with a brain, know Gettleman drafts BPA, accepts it, and starts looking at all the possibities of the plays the could be available.

Good stuff there.

Where it goes bad, is that others only see this as the fans actually suggesting that we go runningback, defensive end, whatever, and over react by telling us why it's a bad 8dea to draft good players.

(Laughing yet?)

Gettleman hasn't wiffed in the first two rounds, and shows he is more than good at his job.

So I'm alright with whomever he picks.

I'm looking forward to whomever the picks are, that the OP won't like.

[Car123]

Picking a rb in the 1st is a waste in today's NFL. You can find quality rb in other rounds. Plus a good rb won't be succesful running behind a terrible offensive line.

[LinvilleGorge]

This "you can find (insert position here) in later rounds" is the worst argument ever.  You can go through literally every position in the NFL and find late round gems.

 

People say it about OG all the time, yet in the last three drafts there have been 6 OGs taken in the 1st round including two in the top 10.

[GoobyPls]

Went 12-4 with very similar players on offence (and way better players on defense) by allowed the 2nd fewest points in the league. I think the gunslinging team that you're looking for is the Denver Broncos.

Also, 1-20 after being down by two TD's seems like a population statistic, i.e. I would think most teams are 1-20 when down by two TD's. That's like someone saying that white cars cause 51% of car accidents (like white cars cause accidents), but then also mentioning that 51% of cars on the road are white.

Can anyone run down the stats on this?

We are 1-17 worst percentage in the NFL since 2011

But apparently that's not a problem

[CPantherKing]

The coaches haven't had much to work in the offensive side of football either.

 

The probability for an NFL team coming back from a 14 point deficit to win a game is 6%.

 

This has nothing to do with the talent on the field at this point and everything to do with the coaching.

 

You could have a pro bowl team on the field against an average team in the NFL. When you are down by 14 points it is about the ability of the coaches to adjust the game plan. A team can turn the ball over 3 times at this point in the game and still have a 4% chance of winning the game. Ball control and game managers are irrational decisions by the coaches at this point in the game. If you have the coaches who preach patience and sticking to the game plan at this point in the game, then your team has little to no chance of winning the game. The belief that a team can easily come back from a 14 point deficit by simply executing plays on offense and defense is irrational even in the 1st quarter. It is the coaches responsibility to maximize the opportunities for players by increasing the probability of winning for a given game situation.

It is surprising how many teams fail to grasp the power of understanding their situation rationally and allowing that to dictate their coaching decisions. Instead you see coaches create a game plan with little to no flexibility and believe that if everything goes to plan they will win. Then when it does not go to plan, which will happen more often than not, they allow themselves to make decisions based on gut instinct.

Rivera tends to believe he can control the game if he is patient and sticks to his plan regardless of the situation the players are immersed in on the field. Shula has demonstrated this irrational behavior in coaching time and time again with his long 10 to 15 play drives that eat up 4+ minutes of clock in the second half of a game while trailing by 10 or more points. There have been 10 of the past 35 games this has occurred in over the 2013 and 2014 seasons - including the 2 playoff losses. The Panthers are 1-9 in those games. It is very apparent the game planning and coaching need to change.

The coaches are presented with a situation where there is a small window to give the team a shot at a win and they decide to give the game away because they do not want to risk turning the ball over. They fail to realize they have a better chance of turning the ball over 3 times in the second half and winning the game than they do playing ball control and eating up clock for a chance at scoring to close the gap and still trail. Then the coaches have the nerve or ignorance to say the players had opportunities and failed to execute. Truth is the coaches made it harder on their players with the decisions they made in game management and were more of an obstacle to their own players than the opposing team was in the second half.

The Patriots in comparison were in the same situation 9 times over the past 2013 and 2014 seasons. They went 4-5 in those games. They only ran long drives over 4 minutes in 3 of those games; 1 win against Seattle in the Super Bowl and 2 losses including the loss to the Broncos in the 2013 AFC conference championship. Also, the long drives of the Patriots ended on downs for the losses and a touchdown in the win. Belichick did not punt the ball or go for a FG on long drives while trailing even though the Patriots were in range. This is the difference between a coach that will win in the playoffs and a coach that will lose in the playoffs.

There is no accounting for the fact that when situations arrive for the Panthers that give them less than a 10% chance of winning a game the coaches and players all have different gut instincts and the team as a whole is no longer on the same page. Think of it like an escape plan. If you do not have one, then everyone panics and mistakes are made to the determent of everyone. If you have an escape plan everyone trusts in, you will have a much better chance at making that small window of victory a reality with everyone on the same page rather than closing it and losing control of your team as a whole.

One would believe anyone who is factoring into game management and play calling would want to master game theory while having a fair understanding of situational and kinematic probability - like Belichick demonstrates with his system. Seems a majority of coaches like to fly by the seat of their pants and trust their gut while demonstrating a lack of awareness regarding their use of subjective probability.

[GoobyPls]

The probability for an NFL team coming back from a 14 point deficit to win a game is 6%.

This has nothing to do with the talent on the field at this point and everything to do with the coaching.

You could have a pro bowl team on the field against an average team in the NFL. When you are down by 14 points it is about the ability of the coaches to adjust the game plan. A team can turn the ball over 3 times at this point in the game and still have a 4% chance of winning the game. Ball control and game managers are irrational decisions by the coaches at this point in the game. If you have the coaches who preach patience and sticking to the game plan at this point in the game, then your team has little to no chance of winning the game. The belief that a team can easily come back from a 14 point deficit by simply executing plays on offense and defense is irrational even in the 1st quarter. It is the coaches responsibility to maximize the opportunities for players by increasing the probability of winning for a given game situation.

It is surprising how many teams fail to grasp the power of understanding their situation rationally and allowing that to dictate their coaching decisions. Instead you see coaches create a game plan with little to no flexibility and believe that if everything goes to plan they will win. Then when it does not go to plan, which will happen more often than not, they allow themselves to make decisions based on gut instinct.

Rivera tends to believe he can control the game if he is patient and sticks to his plan regardless of the situation the players are immersed in on the field. Shula has demonstrated this irrational behavior in coaching time and time again with his long 10 to 15 play drives that eat up 4+ minutes of clock in the second half of a game while trailing by 10 or more points. There have been 10 of the past 35 games this has occurred in over the 2013 and 2014 seasons - including the 2 playoff losses. The Panthers are 1-9 in those games. It is very apparent the game planning and coaching need to change.

The coaches are presented with a situation where there is a small window to give the team a shot at a win and they decide to give the game away because they do not want to risk turning the ball over. They fail to realize they have a better chance of turning the ball over 3 times in the second half and winning the game than they do playing ball control and eating up clock for a chance at scoring to close the gap and still trail. Then the coaches have the nerve or ignorance to say the players had opportunities and failed to execute. Truth is the coaches made it harder on their players with the decisions they made in game management and were more of an obstacle to their own players than the opposing team was in the second half.

The Patriots in comparison were in the same situation 9 times over the past 2013 and 2014 seasons. They went 4-5 in those games. They only ran long drives over 4 minutes in 3 of those games; 1 win against Seattle in the Super Bowl and 2 losses including the loss to the Broncos in the 2013 AFC conference championship. Also, the long drives of the Patriots ended on downs for the losses and a touchdown in the win. Belichick did not punt the ball or go for a FG on long drives while trailing even though the Patriots were in range. This is the difference between a coach that will win in the playoffs and a coach that will lose in the playoffs.

There is no accounting for the fact that when situations arrive for the Panthers that give them less than a 10% chance of winning a game the coaches and players all have different gut instincts and the team as a whole is no longer on the same page. Think of it like an escape plan. If you do not have one, then everyone panics and mistakes are made to the determent of everyone. If you have an escape plan everyone trusts in, you will have a much better chance at making that small window of victory a reality with everyone on the same page rather than closing it and losing control of your team as a whole.

One would believe anyone who is factoring into game management and play calling would want to master game theory while having a fair understanding of situational and kinematic probability - like Belichick demonstrates with his system. Seems a majority of coaches like to fly by the seat of their pants and trust their gut while demonstrating a lack of awareness regarding their use of subjective probability.

Shula and Rivera have miss managed some games, like Atlanta last season.

But at the end of the day when we went up against a team like GB that you know they are gonna score and we are gonna have to go toe to toe in a shootout, what is the coaching staff supposed to do? when your line can't protect and your receivers can't get separation or scare anyone deep?

What is the coaching staff supposedly to do when the opposing D takes away our strength?

[Diehardpanther02]

Why can't we use the passing game to open up the running game?

without another legit receiver teams can just stack the box and force us to pass.

You can im just saying its not good to always pass to open the run jus like always running to open the pass is not wise. Do it based on the scheme of the defense. If their stacked throw, if their showing like they wanna cover run. Its Really not that hard to understand. A Rb will open up the pass for the WRS. And a WR opens up lanes for the RB. So they are equally valuable is my

point.

... But a good line will open for ALL!

[GoobyPls]

You can im just saying its not good to always pass to open the run jus like always running to open the pass is not wise. Do it based on the scheme of the defense. If their stacked throw, if their showing like they wanna cover run. Its Really not that hard to understand. A Rb will open up the pass for the WRS. And a WR opens up lanes for the RB. So they are equally valuable is my

point.

... But a good line will open for ALL!

 

I understand that, all I know is I don't want a RB with the first 3 picks much less in the first. Line or receiver

[panthers55]

I understand that, all I know is I don't want a RB with the first 3 picks much less in the first. Line or receiver

That kind of thinking is very Hurneyesque.  You dont make any hard and fast rules in the draft except to find the best players available and not focus solely on need.  If you fall in love with a player you end up reaching and making a huge mistake. You can't decide before the fact what position will go where.  When we picked Ealy last year most folks said it was a wasted pick when we needed an offensive tackle.  However, who knew that Alexander and Hardy would miss almost the whole season.  What was perceived as a strength was now a huge weakness and Ealy was very much needed.

 

While I can agree that I want a WR if Strong or Perriman are there at 25, I would have to really consider a running back if Gordon or Gurley are there as well.  I don't know that anyone of the folks just mentioned will be there which might make me go in a whole new direction.  That whole decisionmaking process based on what we need rather than who is available is faulty in my opinion and I held that belief before Gettleman came here. After seeing us reach for Brown and Edwards it was clear that that strategy was flawed.

[GoobyPls]

That kind of thinking is very Hurneyesque. You dont make any hard and fast rules in the draft except to find the best players available and not focus solely on need. If you fall in love with a player you end up reaching and making a huge mistake. You can't decide before the fact what position will go where. When we picked Ealy last year most folks said it was a wasted pick when we needed an offensive tackle. However, who knew that Alexander and Hardy would miss almost the whole season. What was perceived as a strength was now a huge weakness and Ealy was very much needed.

While I can agree that I want a WR if Strong or Perriman are there at 25, I would have to really consider a running back if Gordon or Gurley are there as well. I don't know that anyone of the folks just mentioned will be there which might make me go in a whole new direction. That whole decisionmaking process based on what we need rather than who is available is faulty in my opinion and I held that belief before Gettleman came here. After seeing us reach for Brown and Edwards it was clear that that strategy was flawed.

I already stated this earlier if we were to redo the draft do you really think we would draft Ealy ahead of those receivers we passed on? Ealy was a no show 80% of the season.

And what makes Gurley and Gordon the BPA? Both of them played for schools known for having productive college backs who aren't good pros.

[beastson]

Everybody knows we'll never beat Seattle until this offense improves, first at the OC position 

[MichaelNewtonII]

I could easily make a thread titled, "Why reaching on a player based on need won't solve our issues".

not really much reaching on WRs these days, they are coming in and tearing ish up