Ok here is why people don't respect the panthers

[frash.exe]

Hopefully this will make it all crystal clear to you people, because i've already seen plenty of threads on power rankings and whatever the hell else...

I was reading the daily news (me being the north jersey yankee italian asshole that i am) and in the sports section they had this NFL preview where they divided the teams up by the elites, contenders, pretenders, and duds. We were the first team under pretenders.

Your average panther fan would've poo in the newspaper, ripped it to shreds and set it on fire in an irate fit of passion, but i was pretty much indifferent. This isn't a new thing, it's always happened to us that people just aren't impressed with the Panthers, and this is the reason why.

Other teams are more highly regarded, simply because they've built reputations over the years as solid teams, and continue to field some good football. The panthers are the antithesis. Why?

1. We're a young franchise. This is a huge reason itself so we automatically are at a disadvantage. A lot of teams have traditions of which predate our existence for years and years that they've more or less sustained that contribute to their heritage. What do you think the Steelers are known for? (Defense). The Cowboys? (America's Team--bleh). The Giants? (running game). The Panthers? (uhh....)

2. We are consistently inconsistent. We haven't established ourselves as contenders. We have not made the playoffs two years in a row, nor have we won a playoff game in the last 3 years. Notice almost all contenders have sustained success. The Steelers, the Titans, the Giants, etc. Other respected teams have somewhat lower levels of consistency, but they are still better than ours.

3. We are not synonymous with the word "contender". Ask any random fan to name a contender in the NFC and they're most likely to say "eagles" or "giants" more than anything else.

4. We're allergic to success. Every time the Panthers are proclaimed a good team they follow up with a characteristically bad performance. Plenty of media outlets like to go with a safe pick so they can look like they know what they are talking about, and the Panthers are far from a safe pick. For example, even when all indications point to success, the Panthers far from live up to the forecast. The playoff game last January. It was the perfect matchup for us. Nobody respected Arizona. They'd been awful on the road on the east coast the whole year, we'd been 8-0 at home. The running game was absolutely on fire. Delhomme was firing some good throws up until then. The defense was a little suspect, but one could expect the Panthers to pull through a shootout, especially since we beat them in close scoring earlier in the season. The result? An absolute piss poor performance. The offensive line couldn't handle the undersized Cardinals defensive front four. Delhomme threw into coverage constantly, as the receivers were blanketed a lot. Warner sat back and fired to the open man. Fitzgerald had about 150 of his 166 yards by halftime. The Panthers almost seemed like they didn't want it. The worst part was, we were the only team they blew out. The Falcons came within 6, the Eagles took them into overtime, and the Steelers beat them. While other teams are expected to go, say 9-7 at the worst this year, nobody has an indication if we'll be 11-5 or 4-12.

5. So many question marks surround us. The most important considered by the bulk of the media, QB. Nobody here knows for sure if Delhomme will perform well this year or fail miserably. 99% of the people who are sure he will continue a high level of play probably wear jerseys adorned with Panther graphics. The rest of the football world is skeptical. His projection is unpredictable. Second on the list is the Defense. the unit finished 18th overall last year, giving up 30+ points in each of the last 3 games, the only significant addition has been a 2nd round DE, and we're already missing our interior space-eater for the whole season. The running game is the only dimension people are respecting.

6. Our standards are low compared to better teams. To us, a single 12-4 2008 record is enough to toss us into the top 5. It didn't matter we got manhandled in the playoffs, it didn't matter the previous 2 years we've played like a pile of poo, it's convenient for us to single out the group of games we seemed to be on the ball and draw a conclusion that we're hustlers. Such conclusion is erroneous and premature. Other critics aren't looking at our 12-4, but more how we played down the stretch, which was awful. A 9-6-1 Eagles team didn't have such a lustrous regular season, but won on the road twice in the playoffs. I hate to break the news to all you humble southern folk, but other football fans as well as the mass media expect...a little...more.

All things considered it feels like Panther fans want to cash in on respect the team hasn't earned yet, and a crappy 2006 & 2007 + 12-4 + a poo playoff game doesn't impress people. Guess what: 23 teams have at least made the playoffs once in the last 3 years, we are only one of them. Almost any team can get success every once in a while. What gets the respect is sustained success, and that is a trait we've never captured, and until we do, nobody cares about us, and we will always be known as the unit that can't quite get to the next level.

[raleigh-panther]

Why then, should we keep a coach, he participates in that inconsistency.

Just asking.

oh, wait, best coach we've ever had, check.

[Fox007]

Yup pretty much

[Lt Pinkerton]

Great Post.

[frash.exe]

Why then, should we keep a coach, he participates in that inconsistency.

Just asking.

oh, wait, best coach we've ever had, check.

lol you think you're making a good point that hasn't been discussed in the OP

[Brandon]

Then why the hell are the Saints even ranked highly? Or the Falcons, who have been as much or more inconsistent than us? We've had more success that both teams combined in our short history.

[Sam Mills Fan]

Raging Bull, can't just about all of those points be said about the Falcons who 80% of analysts are picking to win the South?

[Fireball77]

RB you make some good points. Just curious what that paper called the Cowboys since they have had less recent consistency than Carolina as far as playoffs etc.

[frash.exe]

Then why the hell are the Saints even ranked highly? Or the Falcons, who have been as much or more inconsistent than us? We've had more success that both teams combined in our short history.

5. So many question marks surround us. The most important considered by the bulk of the media, QB. Nobody here knows for sure if Delhomme will perform well this year or fail miserably. 99% of the people who are sure he will continue a high level of play probably wear jerseys adorned with Panther graphics. The rest of the football world is skeptical.

that, basically. I don't agree with it much but that's the way it is.

[KillerKat]

Nice, I would add the stadium atomosphere being one of the worst in the league.

[Sam Mills Fan]

Brandon beat me to it.

I think it ultimately boils down to quarterback. Teams with great and/or hyped quarterbacks get preferential treatment on all of these lists.

Saints have Drew Brees. Falcons have Matt Ryan. We have Jake Delhomme.

[Jangler]

Who the hell do you think you are to be so correct?

[Brooklyn Bully]

Small fan base as well, and we have two whole States.

[frash.exe]

RB you make some good points. Just curious what that paper called the Cowboys since they have had less recent consistency than Carolina as far as playoffs etc.

lol, cowboys were under contenders

FWIW, Falcons were also considered contenders, and the Saints were considered sleepers