Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

"Panthers victory over Seattle means nothing"

heelinfine

By heelinfine,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

CPcavedweller Veteran

CPcavedweller

Posted
Posted

so for us to be "objective" we have to believe a stat nerds narrative about our team no matter how absurd hhis argument is? This article or responses have nothing to  do with Seattle anyway, so what is your point?

The point is not directed at the article but the bandwagon fools who have jumped on since spring who sound a lot like Eagles fans. To discredit what Seattle has done in the past and the teams they have played this season and lost to is to discredit our win. 

That's my point. You can say we knock a team into obscurity and then boo hoo when the media does the same thing and claims our win wasn't that impressive. It was a good win and that will show at the end of the year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MadHatter Rookie

MadHatter

Posted
Posted

Hey, it was great to beat the Seahawks and it's great to celebrate. Honestly though, we just beat an overhyped 2-3 team. Next up is another team that was overhyped in the offseason and is underperforming now. And then we play yet another underperforming team that everyone thought would win their division.

Until we go head to head with Green Bay and come out a winner, we aren't going to be crowned as king of the league. 

This was great, but quit expecting everyone out there to treat us like we've won a Super Bowl before. 

Leave that for next year.

Seattle is NOT an overhyped bad team.  Their 4 losses are by a total of 20 points and 3 of them were against undefeated teams (Carolina, GB, and Cincy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*FreeFua* Grand Master

*FreeFua*

Posted
Posted

Seattle is NOT an overhyped bad team.  Their 4 losses are by a total of 20 points and 3 of them were against undefeated teams (Carolina, GB, and Cincy).

Agree, their other loss came to a St.Louis team that ALWAYS plays them tough too. I wouldn't be surprised to see Seattle finish 12-4. Their 4th quarter collapses date back to the SB last year where they blew a 10 point lead in the 4th. At some point they'll figure it out, too much talent not to. Point is they're a good team and yesterdays win was HUGE. Yesterday proved this team is capable of competing with anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
heelinfine Newbie

heelinfine

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The point is not directed at the article but the bandwagon fools who have jumped on since spring who sound a lot like Eagles fans. To discredit what Seattle has done in the past and the teams they have played this season and lost to is to discredit our win. 

That's my point. You can say we knock a team into obscurity and then boo hoo when the media does the same thing and claims our win wasn't that impressive. It was a good win and that will show at the end of the year. 

Oh ok. I misunderstood your post. I actually agree with you. Seattle is still a good team, that has lost to good teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

i hope the hate and disrespect keep coming. i hope that they end up saying that we are the worst team to ever win a lombardi and then the worst team to ever win them back to back. i hope they say we have the worst dynasty ever in the history of football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...