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!

     

Poll: Players vs Coaching


Eazy-E

Who is more to blame for our struggles this season?  

87 members have voted

  1. 1. Are the players or the coaches a bigger issue in the Panthers struggles this season?

    • Players
      23
    • Coaches
      63


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, rbsponsel52 said:

It should be:

Players

Coaches

Both

Not just 2

Holy poo, if some of y'all don't like the damn poll then don't take it and create your own.

I'm almost 99.999999% positive that Eazy hasn't got a gun at your head forcing you to do something you don't want to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m with mostly everybody. I still believe we blow the skins out if luck didn’t go 100% towards skins. 

Instead of bitching and moaning, i enjoy the game of football because there is so much chance involved at every step. It’s not predictable. You don’t win every game, unless luck really stacks on your side.. I think we have a great team and great coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IceWhiteice said:

This coaching staff don’t attack weaknesses. They stick to what they want to do. That’s why top coaches succeed and we stay up and down. We have had enough talent here to consistently win. Although we have made the playoffs we really didn’t have a chance but 2015

If I'm not mistaken we attacked the weak-side of the field all game because that was the redskins weakness....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

If I'm not mistaken we attacked the weak-side of the field all game because that was the redskins weakness....

It wasn’t working. Rivera has been on record saying that they want to run the ball and play that same defense. How has that worked against the Falcons and Saints?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m one of the more pro-Rivera posters on this board, so flame me if you want. 

I think most of this has to do with turnover at the coordinator positions. Think about it: a supervisor at a senior analyst position is promoted to manager of the department after his predecessor gets promoted to director at a different company. He’s never been in this role before and he’s expected to learn on the fly while adhering to the high expectations of the company. I’m not making excuses for Washington as the defense has been mediocre thus far but I think much of our struggles have to do with his inexperience and the players getting used to his style. I’m hoping RR steps in and has more of a hand in the defensive gameplan and calls, but I get the notion that he’d rather lose than micromanage. In a corporate office setting that might fly for a bit, but in the NFL that’s a great way to get fired.

Norv on the other hand has a plethora of experience, but it is obvious that our younger guys are struggling to grasp his playbook (hence why Torrey Smith is playing more than Samuel).

So I think it’s coaching-related but more so due to turnover rather than competence.

At the end of the day, we are still over .500 with a lot of football to be played and a lot of talent on both sides of the ball. I’m not throwing in the towel just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i've never once in my life said "man that was a REALLY well coached game, if only the players didn't fail to live up to that great coaching."

these are all NFL athletes. the worst player on the Panthers is still a world class player. if you put an amazing coach and playcaller at the reins then they're going to succeed with this roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunday was terrible execution and terrible personnel and gameplanning. But no matter if the players execute or not, that still comes down to the coaching. We have our #1 pick returning punts and he fumbled. Guess what, it was a coaching decision to have him back there. Short yardage going with CMC and a 2.7 ypc avg? Coaching decision not to put our short yardage back in there or use cam on a sneak. Those last throws? Norv called the plays and put him in a position to do that. I really think old Ronnie wasn't happy we weren't super conservative on offense the first few weeks and told Norv to tone it down. Cam is now a game manager and you can thank Ron for that. No deep passes, doesn't want Cam running, wants ball control. Absolute poo. I've been alright with Ron, but ultimately Tepper has to decide what to do after the season. He's now officially the richest owner in football, he can literally do what he wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tiger7_88 said:

Holy poo, if some of y'all don't like the damn poll then don't take it and create your own.

I'm almost 99.999999% positive that Eazy hasn't got a gun at your head forcing you to do something you don't want to do.

Oooorrrr

We can vote for neither and express our opinion in the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Icege said:

Oooorrrr

We can vote for neither and express our opinion in the thread.

I didn’t mean to create hostility with a simple poll and I am sorry people don’t like the fact that there are only two choices. 

I put the word “More” in the question for a reason. I am sure no one on this forum thinks that it is solely the players or coaches fault. That is why I asked who is “More” to blame. If you feel it is a dead 50/50 split then I am sorry there is not a “both” option. I am just trying to gauge which way the scale is tipping.

We all love tits and ass but you’d be lying if you said you’ve never been asked if you’re a tits or an ass man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Joe the Show said:

Coaches didn't fumble twice.  Coaches didn't miss throws on the potential game winning drive.  Coaches didn't commit stupid offsides penalties.

Now you could argue the penalties are the result of bad coaching earlier in the week.  But the rest is on the players.

No coaches don' get that privilege. There job is to know and prepare the team for big moments and to remind them of what is at stake and to put them in the best situation at all times. Yes mistakes were made in the game by players but that does not excuse the coaches bc this is football things like that happen and you should be prepared as a coach and prepared your players for those moments. Not going for it on 4th down and short is saying alot. Last week you had confidence in a kicker to make a 63yards this game you didn' have enough confidence in your team. Offense to get the 1st down and defense to stop opponent if they had to. Just as the players are inconsistent so is the coaching staff. It shows Rivera just does not understand situational football. He is either all to the left or all to the right.  He will not be able to get a SB win with this type of coaching. I' sorry I just dont see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bartin said:

I’m at like 65% coaching and 35% players so I don’t really know how to vote.

I think our DL has been absolute ass so that’s on the players but I think Washington could and should blitz more.

I think our offensive play calling and particularly the personnel decisions could be much better but the execution there has also been lacking.

Pretty much this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this game is a great example. I pretty much completely put the loss of this game on DJ Moore for fumbling. It changed the entire game.

Otherwise, Cam was pressing this game. Multiple times he took the deeper risker shot when he should have been looking underneath for the chain moving targets. Those two endzone looks at the end of the game were ridiculous when we had time and space to pick up another first. Also, he kept it too many times for weak yardage.

I'm just not seeing anything that game changing from Luke. Maybe he's getting eaten up more by the O-line due to our D-line, but I've seen him over pursue into holes he can't get out of and I'm not impressed by his pass coverage. Pass rush still sucks, he should never be doing it when we have Shaq and TD.

D-line was generally uninspiring, but some nice things from Addison and Peppers with a powerful hit.

Would be nice to see Eric Reid doing more than sitting back deep in coverage, they started moving him up on the LOS and I think it paid off.

No Samuel is very disappointing, no excuse for him not to be out there more after the Giants game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • 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.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...