Panthers owner to PSL owners: Success “won’t happen overnight”

[WOW!!]

30 minutes ago, Tbe said:

“For starters, former Panthers offensive lineman Geoff Schwartz said the language has changed over the past decade.

“Back then when that happened, it wasn’t referred to as tanking. It just was, OK, we’ll have to try to win with worse players,” Schwartz said. “Now, it feels like the term, tanking, is universal. Rebuild, tank, whatever you want to say. … This year feels like a rebuild. It felt like we were tanking in 2010.”

Several of Schwartz’s teammates from that 2-14 team said the same thing, including one who pointed out that if 2010 was a roster reboot, this year feels like more of an organizationwide rebuild for the Panthers.”

 

Problem is this team on paper wasn't the worst team and had the lowest talent.. Again they had atleast 5 pro bowl talented players and were coming off of a 12-4 team  a year before.. Not to mention they gave out crazy contracts that off season... Shcawrts is just hindsight 20/20 the opinion...

[X-Clown]

We've really got people here arguing that the 2010 season was Richardson and co. putting on their best effort to win with lame duck Fox and the law firm of Moore & Clausen & St. Pierre which just happened to be the year before the lockout was set to occur?

[Tbe]

1 minute ago, WOW!! said:

Problem is this team on paper wasn't the worst team and had the lowest talent.. Again they had atleast 5 pro bowl talented players and were coming off of a 12-4 team  a year before.. Not to mention they gave out crazy contracts that off season... Shcawrts is just hindsight 20/20 the opinion...

It wasn’t just Schwartz saying that. Several players from that squat said the same thing.

Either way, I’d rather have a plan to try and get better for the long term than suck for decades waiting for things to happen “naturally”.

[X-Clown]

8 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

Problem is this team on paper wasn't the worst team and had the lowest talent.. Again they had atleast 5 pro bowl talented players and were coming off of a 12-4 team  a year before.. Not to mention they gave out crazy contracts that off season... Shcawrts is just hindsight 20/20 the opinion...

You're getting your years mixed up. They were 12-4 in 2008 and 8-8 in 2009 (and the 8-8 was after winning 3 out of 4 once eliminated from the playoffs in December). All of the crazy contracts were given out during the offseason leading up to 2011. Read the article below, it even cites that Gross and Steve Smith were questioning whether they should stay or not after the season because it didn't look like we were committed to winning.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8213b0de/article/panthers-owner-richardson-turns-big-spender-in-free-agency

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

 

LOL, yes. Because their stellar 10-6 season where they lost in the wildcard round was preceded by records of 4-12, 2-14 & 4-12. 

Sure, you want to know how many starters were on that 2013 KC team that Reid took over from that 2010 roster?

Offense

Jamaal Charles(drafted 3rd round 2008)

Dwayne Bowe(drafted 1st round[23rd overall] in 2007)

Defense

Derrick Johnson(drafted 1st round[15th overall] in 2005)

Eric Berry(drafted 1st round[5th overall] in 2010)

Tamba Hali(drafted 1st round[23rd overall] in 2006)

Brandon Flowers(drafted 2nd round in 2008)

Kendrick Lewis(drafted 5th round in 2010)

Brandon Albert(drafted 1st round[15th overall] in 2008)

 

So 5 starters from the three years of eating poo and only two from the first round. Not exactly a windfall of talent that they gained to build his team. 

 

[WOW!!]

3 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

We've really got people here arguing that the 2010 season was Richardson and co. putting on their best effort to win with lame duck Fox and the law firm of Moore & Clausen & St. Pierre which just happened to be the year before the lockout was set to occur?

I know you ppl are devoid of doing any research  but it's not that hard to look and see that roster wasn't that bad.. And Matt Moore was coming off 6 game winning streak   and they barely missed the playoffs that year.. Also Clausen by most analysts was considered pro ready and a steal...

[kungfoodude]

14 minutes ago, Panther'sBigD said:

So what you're saying is, they're NOT an example of a quick turnaround. Got it. Thanks!

Yeah, it is a perfect example. When they had 6 win seasons or 8 win seasons, they immediately bounced back. But I guess you want to live in this fantasy land of no team getting better after having 1-2 down seasons. That's fine, just keep making yourself look like a buffoon. 

[WOW!!]

14 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

You're getting your years mixed up. They were 12-4 in 2008 and 8-8 in 2009 (and the 8-8 was after winning 3 out of 4 once eliminated from the playoffs in December). All of the crazy contracts were given out during the offseason leading up to 2011. Read the article below, it even cites that Gross and Steve Smith were questioning whether they should stay or not after the season because it didn't look like we were committed to winning.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8213b0de/article/panthers-owner-richardson-turns-big-spender-in-free-agency

I said the year before.. 2008.. 2009 Jake fell apart at the beginning of the season.. Fox waited to long to bring Moore in and they went on a winning streak and almost made the playoffs..  They were still in the playoff hunt up until the last game  and lost out due to a points thing in the later games 2009.. look it up.. .. Look at the roster that team wasn't the worst roster in the league.. They were trying to have a bounce back season.. 

[WOW!!]

17 minutes ago, Tbe said:

It wasn’t just Schwartz saying that. Several players from that squat said the same thing.

Either way, I’d rather have a plan to try and get better for the long term than suck for decades waiting for things to happen “naturally”.

It is dumb because tank plans fail.. Asked the Dolphins..  To many variables..

1. You aren't the only team doing it..

2. Players get hurt or fug up their draft stock..

3. Pro players aren't going to play bad because you want them to..

And even if you think the Panthers were trying to tank in 2010 for Luck.. 

How did that Work out??

[Panther'sBigD]

5 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yeah, it is a perfect example. When they had 6 win seasons or 8 win seasons, they immediately bounced back. But I guess you want to live in this fantasy land of no team getting better after having 1-2 down seasons. That's fine, just keep making yourself look like a buffoon. 

You're the one that trotted them out as an example of a team that was able to make a 'quick turnaround.' They haven't had a losing record in 17 years. A lot has changed in the NFL since then. Their 'turnarounds' have been 4 games or less. That's not a turnaround, it's coming back from a down year. A turnaround would be what Tepper and Rhule are attempting. 

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, Panther'sBigD said:

You're the one that trotted them out as an example of a team that was able to make a 'quick turnaround.' They haven't had a losing record in 17 years. A lot has changed in the NFL since then. Their 'turnarounds' have been 4 games or less. That's not a turnaround, it's coming back from a down year. A turnaround would be what Tepper and Rhule are attempting. 

You can twist the word to whatever you want it to mean but it doesn't change the fact that multiple examples were given to your incredibly stupid question. The fact that Green Bay didn't IMMEDIATELY come to mind makes me wonder how much of the NFL you actually follow at all. 

[Tbe]

4 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

It is dumb because tank plans fail.. Asked the Dolphins..  To many variables..

1. You aren't the only team doing it..

2. Players get hurt or fug up their draft stock..

3. Pro players aren't going to play bad because you want them to..

And even if you think the Panthers were trying to tank in 2010 for Luck.. 

How did that Work out??

So there is risk in life? Interesting.

I guess your plan is to do nothing and wait for good things to happen. 
 

I’d rather us be bold and try something and fail than doing nothing.

[Mr. Scot]

Players are playing for their next paycheck / to feed their families. They're not going to tank.

Young players are trying to make a name for themselves in what might be their only shot. They're not going to tank.

Older players might be riding out their last chance at a ring or glory. They're not going to tank.

Coaches and assistants are likewise coaching for their jobs and are sometimes a bad season away from unemployment. They're not going to tank.

About the only way that the team could successfully tank would be to take the "Major League" approach and fill a roster with guys who shouldn't even be there. If you can put together a bad enough roster, then you might actually be able to tank despite the best efforts of those involved.

So I guess the question becomes can our current leadership put together a roster that stinks bad enough to get us a really high pick?

Well, given that they've done so before even when they weren't actually trying to, I'd say the answer is probably yes.

[Panther'sBigD]

6 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

You can twist the word to whatever you want it to mean but it doesn't change the fact that multiple examples were given to your incredibly stupid question. The fact that Green Bay didn't IMMEDIATELY come to mind makes me wonder how much of the NFL you actually follow at all. 

My original post was, "Name two teams that have had 'quick turnarounds' that have had sustained success." The two examples you gave were a team that hasn't had a losing record in almost two decades, and a team that had a quick turnaround, but has not shown any ability to sustain it yet, and Aaron Rodgers is getting older and more beaten up, so nothing is certain.