John Fox saved his job...

[frash.exe]

There's only logic in it if you think that "almost" hitting .500 just a season after going 12-4 with the same team is acceptable.

SMF, there were some people whom fox gained enough in faith from "12-4" before this season began that they wouldn't care as long as they're not 1-15 in 2009 (which is irrelevant now) they've concluded he should be here in 2010. You can't reason with people who promote that kind of a job security in any capacity.

[Wither]

Vikings - will be a tough game but home field might give enough for a W

Pats - their weaknesses line up well with our strengths

Giants - aren't showing they're an elite team that were to start off

Saints - we gave them a run for their money in the dome, again home field could prove to be the difference

I think the Patriots will pull out a win mostly because... it just seems like they will. In my opinion, they are usually lucky (disregarding this past week).

The Giants... well, that should be a win.

The Saints again? Revenge time, regardless of who is starting on their team.

I actually feel like the Vikings game is more clear-cut than usual; it just feels like an upset game.

Vikes have the Williams Wall on the line, Jared Allen off the edge. Antoine Winfield can do at least a passable job of covering Smith, especially with the pass rush they'll likely be able to generate on a depleted Panthers O-line.

There's a good chance we'll be minus Brad Hoover too. And on the flip side, with their O-line, and with Thomas Davis out, I'm not liking our chances of stopping Adrian Peterson.

Vikes game just seems like the least winnable of the bunch to me.

Sometimes great players and great teams fall to the underdogs (*COUGH* Arizona *COUGH*).

[Sam Mills Fan]

SMF, there were some people whom fox gained enough in faith from "12-4" before this season began that they wouldn't care as long as they're not 1-15 in 2009 (which is irrelevant now) they've concluded he should be here in 2010. You can't reason with people who promote that kind of a job security in any capacity.

I guess that's true. There are a lot of enablers on talk radio and places like here that are perfectly happy to just go 8-8 and 7-9 every other year as long as they have an 11-5 season every now and then where they get to pretend that we have a good team. It's really sad. It shows incredible weakness as a fanbase that that kind of mediocrity is acceptable.

[Mr ocho nueve]

Fox was really never a problem in my eyes. The guy is a great coach, players know this and most fans know this. Look at Buffalo, Cleveland, Oakland those teams don't even have a head coach anymore in my eyes

After the 0-3 start, was anyone really thinking about playoffs at that point? I know I wasn't. I just wanted to see our team start to play better and be more productive, which is happening now. Now we can START to speculate a playoff spot, but if we can at least finish strong then I hope that Fox stays here in Carolina.

[Sam Mills Fan]

John Fox isn't a great coach. He's not a terrible coach. He's a mediocre coach and his teams reflect his mediocrity.

[Mr. Scot]

There's only logic in it if you think that "almost" hitting .500 just a season after going 12-4 with the same team is acceptable.

I'm personally tired of Fox (a lot of people are). And I have enough differences with his approach that I'd be okay with going in another direction.

The problem: All of that is pretty subjective.

Smart owners don't make franchise changing decisions based on feelings. Objectively speaking, Fox still has a better coaching record than a fair number of other guys. Factor in that players at important positions have been lost for the year, plus improvement in Delhomme's game (if it continues) and you have the basis to argue that Fox's coaching made the season record a lot better than it should have been.

That's how it works.

Would I like a new coach? I'm on the fence, honestly, but I'm by no means confident that a losing record means Fox is out.

[Wither]

Are there that many "good" or "great" coaches, then?

[OneBadassCat]

We only have 4 wins. He hasn't saved it yet, but I'm not sure if it was in that much jeopardy to begin with.

[Mr. Scot]

Everybody wants the shiny new toy.

Realistically speaking, a new coach likely means at least a year of mediocrity, if not worse. To be willing to brave that, you have to believe that the franchise under the current leadership is so far beyond repair that you're willing to rebuild from the ground up, if necessary.

Some believe that. Others don't. I'm on the fence.

The question of course, is what Jerry Richardson believes. Given that the man shoved his own sons out the door, you'd have to say he's willing to make changes - even radical ones - if he feels they're needed.

[Sam Mills Fan]

Smart owners don't make franchise changing decisions based on feelings. Objectively speaking, Fox still has a better coaching record than a fair number of other guys. Factor in that players at important positions have been lost for the year, plus improvement in Delhomme's game (if it continues) and you have the basis to argue that Fox's coaching made the season record a lot better than it should have been.

With respect, these are nothing more than enabling excuses.

Sure, John Fox has a better record than a lot of other coaches, but I think this fanbase and Mr. Richardson need to ask themselves: Is having the tenth to twelfth best coach in the league with a team that consistently hovers between the tenth and twentieth best team in the league acceptable? If we get another decade of this, is that acceptable?

Injuries...every team has them. The Colts have suffered significant injuries and they're 9-0. The Steelers have had significant injuries and everyone knows they'll be making another deep playoff run. Great teams can handle significant injuries. Why can't we?

As to Jake's improvement, is it really a good argument that *one* great game from Jake this season warrants the ignoring of his atrocious play earlier this season? If we had a competent quarterback, we would have *at least* beaten Buffalo and New Orleans and we'd be 6-3 and sitting in the driver's seat for the top wild card spot. Among players, he, and he alone, is the reason why we have a losing record. And who has refused to continue looking for a real upgrade? Johnathan Percy Fox III.

[MurkN]

As long as we win at least half of our games each season, I'm satisfied with John Fox. I can understand the occasional 7-9 since he makes up for it the following year. As much as it could be better, why take that chance and end up like the bottom feeders in the league? Being consistently at .500 keeps us under the radar as well as prevents people from calling us terrible. Who knows, we might get lucky and get another Super Bowl appearance!

/accepting mediocrity

[Sam Mills Fan]

Are there that many "good" or "great" coaches, then?

Of course. Have you seen the coaches that will be available for next season? Cowher, Shanahan, Holmgren....all of them had multiple back-to-back winning seasons, never went five years without a playoff win, and all have Super Bowl rings. And they're all better than John Fox.

And there are many promising coordinators out there as well, although the failure of most rookie head coaches that were coordinators last year makes me a little nervous towards going after one.

[Sam Mills Fan]

Realistically speaking, a new coach likely means at least a year of mediocrity, if not worse. To be willing to brave that

Brave that? Mediocrity sounds par for the course, so I would hardly consider that braving something.

[KillerKat]

Im so tired of mediocrity being accepted. Im so tired of sticking with something that doesn't work just because of the uncertainty of something new. It drives me crazy. It also drives me crazy that other fans accept this. That they are just fine with supporting a coach and QB that will get us no where.

We have one game ONE GAME where we play like we were supposed to starting week 1 not week f**king 10 and the apologists and delusionists come out of the wood work, sticking up their noses at everyone else who knows that as long as Fox and Jake are here we aren't getting a Super Bowl ring. When we are bad, they make excuses. When we are good, they act like they're better than anyone else that actually is in reality. Its the same ol song and dance and Im sick of it.

There is no other simple way to put it. If you are fine with just a good season here and there mixed in with seasons at or below .500, good for you. But other fans want more than that and as long as Fox is here and as long as Jake is our QB we can all kiss our Super Bowl wishes good bye.