Be careful what you wish for....

[carolinanimal]

also i dont think it is so much his coaching but his philisophy. it works for a team that is horrible. it gives you a good basis for a team and keeps you in games. but it hasnt taken us to the next level. keep it close and hope to win at the end works when you have perfect execution, but leaves little room for any type of error. his philosopy has been consistently inconsistent. for as much as you talk about fox winning records, the falcons will be the first to have back to back winning records and we will still be mired in mediocrity.

[X-Clown]

First line is Panthers wins under Fox

Second is Falcons wins in the same period

Third is Bucs

Fourth is Saints.

Then you have the totals, the best year, the worst, and the average

07 11 07 11 08 07 12 | 63 | 12 | 07 | 09

09 05 11 08 07 04 11 | 55 | 11 | 04 | 08

12 07 05 11 04 09 09 | 57 | 12 | 04 | 08

09 08 08 03 10 07 08 | 53 | 10 | 03 | 08

One of these teams is more consistent than the others. Can you spot which one?

You've got to take into account though that all three of those organizations have undergone head coaching and quarterback changes within that time span (multiple in the case of the Bucs and Falcons). It's not exactly comparing apples to apples. And that's only comparing three other teams in the NFL. Gruden just got fired after back to back 9 win seasons.

[Woodie]

alright woodie, what were the panthers doing differently when they had their "foot on the gas?" explain to me your use of the most tired football cliché in the world.

First of all, you clearly do not understand what people are saying when they talk about letting off the gas. It's not about going from a wide open game plan to suddenly turtleing up; it's more about how they respond to a lead. And for the Panthers, there is a history of backing off once they get a lead....just trying to protect it.

In the case of the Saints game, it wasn't so much what they did differently (although there were some changes, particularly on defense), but more that there were opportunities to be aggressive and put some distance btween them and NO while they were on their heels, but instead he goes into safe mode and takes no chances...basically trying to maintain the lead, and not improve upon it.

If you had read my entire post you would have seen one example I gave, which essentially is that Fox & Co. ran the ball almost exclusively, despite the Saints stacking the box and basically daring them to throw on them. But rather than exploit the defense (which would be the more aggressive approach), Fox did what he almost always does when he gets a lead, play it safe and try to burn the clock. That can work against teams that we are clearly better than, but when you are facing a juggernaut like the Saint's offense, you cannot become complacent because you know that eventually they will make a move, and you need to be far enough ahead to withstand it.

Also, defensively, they started out bringing the house, but after the lead, we backed off and tried to keep everything in front of us to prevent the big play. Heck, even Billick was talking during the game how Fox tends to manage a very conservative game. This is a trend that has been in place since the day Fox arrived. And there's a reason most fans are not comfortable when we get a big lead early, particularly against good offenses, we know this team will go into it's prevention shell.

[Cyberjag]

You've got to take into account though that all three of those organizations have undergone head coaching and quarterback changes within that time span (multiple in the case of the Bucs and Falcons). It's not exactly comparing apples to apples. And that's only comparing three other teams in the NFL. Gruden just got fired after back to back 9 win seasons.

I don't mind acknowledging it, but what do you mean by taking it into account? If anything, it gives more of an argument for Fox's effectiveness. These other teams are all trying to accomplish what he's done, and that's why they've been searching for new coaches and quarterbacks.

If you look at the other teams in the league that have been as successful as the Panthers under Fox, they all have a common denominator--a star QB. We don't have that, yet our coach just keeps on winning.

You can make of that what you will, but to me it's wildly irresponsible to declare that Jake is a terrible quarterback AND Fox is a terrible coach. That combination just flies right in the face of the facts.

[carolinanimal]

he wins every other year.

[Matt Foley]

he wins every other year.

Hopefully it hasn't become every third year.

[Fiz]

First of all, you clearly do not understand what people are saying when they talk about letting off the gas. It's not about going from a wide open game plan to suddenly turtleing up; it's more about how they respond to a lead. And for the Panthers, there is a history of backing off once they get a lead....just trying to protect it.

uh, why not just say they don't respond well to a lead, instead of using a euphemism that indicates they were doing something differently to achieve something then stopped?

or is this one of those things that can mean whatever you want it to mean based on circumstances?

maybe you should work on not getting butthurt when someone calls you out on using a completely meaningless, trite, twee catch phrase to try to sound like you know what you're talking about.

In the case of the Saints game, it wasn't so much what they did differently (although there were some changes, particularly on defense), but more that there were opportunities to be aggressive and put some distance btween them and NO while they were on their heels, but instead he goes into safe mode and takes no chances...basically trying to maintain the lead, and not improve upon it.

which is probably a smart move when you lead the league in turnovers but whatev

If you had read my entire post you would have seen one example I gave, which essentially is that Fox & Co. ran the ball almost exclusively, despite the Saints stacking the box and basically daring them to throw on them.

you want jake delhomme to throw. really.

But rather than exploit the defense (which would be the more aggressive approach),

and suicidal

Fox did what he almost always does when he gets a lead, play it safe and try to burn the clock. That can work against teams that we are clearly better than, but when you are facing a juggernaut like the Saint's offense, you cannot become complacent because you know that eventually they will make a move, and you need to be far enough ahead to withstand it.

yeah god forbid the panthers keep the ball out of their terrible qbs hand and let him get the saints back in the game REALLY quick.

Also, defensively, they started out bringing the house, but after the lead, we backed off and tried to keep everything in front of us to prevent the big play.

lol no they weren't

Heck, even Billick was talking during the game how Fox tends to manage a very conservative game.

oh great, offensive genius brian billick

This is a trend that has been in place since the day Fox arrived.

no one is talking about previous trends except you.

And there's a reason most fans are not comfortable when we get a big lead early, particularly against good offenses, we know this team will go into it's prevention shell.

again, no one is talking about previous games.

for this game, with this situation, with all these factors, what fox did was the right move. i'm sorry you have trouble understanding all the myriad factors that went in to this game. perhaps you should try nfl.com/kids to brush up on information.

also way to backpedal on taking your foot off the gas lol

[carolinanimal]

it might have been the right move to keep the team from commiting huge turnovers, but not agianst a team like the saints. they have the top o in the league, we have a new defense. did any really think we could hold them down all game long? i didnt. thats why points were at a premium. and honestly points dont come out of the running game usually. you cant beat a good team with one hand behind your back!

[X-Clown]

I don't mind acknowledging it, but what do you mean by taking it into account? If anything, it gives more of an argument for Fox's effectiveness. These other teams are all trying to accomplish what he's done, and that's why they've been searching for new coaches and quarterbacks..

Or it argues to the ineffectiveness of Haslett/Brooks, Mora/Vick, Petrino/Harrington, etc. I don't think that when the Falcons hired Mike Smith and drafted Matt Ryan that they were trying to model their organzation after ours, since the ultimate goal is to win the Superbowl. As for Gruden he has a superbowl ring, multiple playoff berths and was coming off back to back winning seasons and it was not good enough to keep his job.

If you look at the other teams in the league that have been as successful as the Panthers under Fox, they all have a common denominator--a star QB. We don't have that, yet our coach just keeps on winning..

I guess one of the things that overrates Fox for me is the stat about "being in the playoff hunt until the last month of the season". The only reason we were in the hunt in two of those years is because the NFC was mediocre. There was one team in 06' that made the playoffs at 8-8 and two in 04' with the same record who ended up getting in. Lots of teams will be in the hunt when the conference is that bad.

He also has gotten some stat padding wins that he has gotten after the playoffs are no longer a possibility against teams that are playing second stringers (i.e. New Orleans in 2006 and Tampa in 2007). 8-8 and 7-9 looks a lot better than 7-9 and 6-10 on paper but in reality both of these squads weren't teams that had a shot in hell of doing anything if they did happen to squeak into the playoffs.

You can make of that what you will, but to me it's wildly irresponsible to declare that Jake is a terrible quarterback AND Fox is a terrible coach. That combination just flies right in the face of the facts.

My opinion is that Jake was a good quarterback that is far from it at this point, and that Fox is a coach who was able to achieve early success but that has ran his course with this team and fanbase. I could be wrong, but I believe that if he is fired at the end of the season he will not be snapped up for a head coaching job by another team that is wanting to play "Foxball".

[frash.exe]

Sean payton supporters in new Orleans, of which I'm sure there are many, would contend that since he's been in charge of the saints they've been the winningest team divisionwise the last four seasons starting in 2006 and counting this season

also he's the only NFC south coach who has won a playoff game in that time span

[Cyberjag]

Or it argues to the ineffectiveness of Haslett/Brooks, Mora/Vick, Petrino/Harrington, etc. I don't think that when the Falcons hired Mike Smith and drafted Matt Ryan that they were trying to model their organzation after ours, since the ultimate goal is to win the Superbowl. As for Gruden he has a superbowl ring, multiple playoff berths and was coming off back to back winning seasons and it was not good enough to keep his job.

Gruden also had seasons with 4 wins. And he inherited a hell of a good team, not a 1-15 mess. And it looks like Atlanta finally has it's act together, but they still have a ways to go to match Fox's success here.

I guess one of the things that overrates Fox for me is the stat about "being in the playoff hunt until the last month of the season". The only reason we were in the hunt in two of those years is because the NFC was mediocre. There was one team in 06' that made the playoffs at 8-8 and two in 04' with the same record who ended up getting in. Lots of teams will be in the hunt when the conference is that bad.

He also has gotten some stat padding wins that he has gotten after the playoffs are no longer a possibility against teams that are playing second stringers (i.e. New Orleans in 2006 and Tampa in 2007). 8-8 and 7-9 looks a lot better than 7-9 and 6-10 on paper but in reality both of these squads weren't teams that had a shot in hell of doing anything if they did happen to squeak into the playoffs.

A win is a win, and he's been in the hunt in the beginning of December. Make all the excuses you care to, the final record is what people remember.

My opinion is that Jake was a good quarterback that is far from it at this point, and that Fox is a coach who was able to achieve early success but that has ran his course with this team and fanbase. I could be wrong, but I believe that if he is fired at the end of the season he will not be snapped up for a head coaching job by another team that is wanting to play "Foxball".

Agree and disagree. I think that if Fox stays he actively looks for a QB of the future, and it won't be a big surprise to me if McCown is our starter next year while said prospect develops. And if Fox is fired, I really disagree with you--he'll be snatched up quick by someone who wishes they could count on seven wins a season or better.

I think there's no question we need a better QB, and it's my personal opinion that Fox made really bad hires in Davidson and Crossman. But he still wins, and he still fills the seats at BofA, and because of that he'll probably still be here next year.

Just an opinion.

[CatMan72]

Agreed, Martz and Seifert were handed the keys to a Ferrari and all they had to do was keep in on the road.

Coughlin made an expansion team a contender, then he made an under-achieving but talented Giants team champions.

[Snake]

Agreed, Martz and Seifert were handed the keys to a Ferrari and all they had to do was keep in on the road.

Coughlin made an expansion team a contender, then he made an under-achieving but talented Giants team champions.

IMO Coughlin gets too much Cred for that championship. There Defense was the won that got them there. That also have not even came close to repeating the success after Spangnolo left. The fact is you add a Top tier Offensive guy with a top tier Defensive guy and you get good results.

[carolinanimal]

Does atlanta really have the far to go Cyberjag? all they have to do is have a winning season this year and they will do more than fox has ever done. who gives a crap if your good every other year. consistently inconsistent! great!