Inside the Carolina Panthers' three seasons of quarterback failure

[top dawg]

3 hours ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Holy poo that is unreal.  I was on the fence about Fitt before now, damn man that doesnt paint a pretty picture

I guess people see it differently. I see it as Fitt catering to Rhule who was beating a drum for Darnold and Mayfield (but especially Darnold).

[Snake]

15 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yeah sorry, can't see that at all. Having Fields was not going to somehow make Rhule a better coach. He was always a disaster.

Also from 4MR...

 

See all what? Rhule was a terrible coach but that doesn't mean Fields will be a terrible player. I don't really have time to go in depth on that but I did summarize why on another post in this thread. 

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

No, Scot, I believe they were in the pro-Herbert camp, and they were lamenting  the fact that we didn't draft Herbert, meaning they were "right" about Herbert.

Full context:

The faction of the organization that was against drafting Herbert received what might have seemed like vindication in Week 3 of the 2020 season, when Bridgewater and the Panthers defeated Herbert and the Chargers in Los Angeles -- Rhule's first NFL win. But behind the scenes, a few of the scouts that had pushed for Herbert squirmed as they watched the 22-year-old throw for 330 yards, showing the poise and command of an offense they believed could have stabilized the position for a decade or more. Even as Carolina celebrated the win, one scout remembers texting another: "Man, we were right."

I could see that. The subject of the paragraph is the faction that was against him but the final sentences definitely sound like they could be about the pro Herbert group.

Either way, I still love to know who the "faction" members were, but either way I suspect they're not here anymore.

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, top dawg said:

I guess people see it differently. I see it as Fitt catering to Rhule who was beating a drum for Darnold and Mayfield (but especially Darnold).

Then to me that is equally as bad.  He is being a cuck if he just agrees to go alone with everything rhule wants without any input.  Why take the job then?  Ive said it before if he disagreed with any of those moves he better have spoken up against it and not try and do it in hindsight.  I think however since tepper is hands on he knows where Fitt stood with all the trades.  Henderson, darnold, baker etc.  But the 5th year option and his logic is all on fitt

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

I am not sure anyone has said that.  I did say that if he drafted Fields or jones he would have a longer leash and therefor probably still have a job

Look a few posts above...

[Pimpdaddy]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

The conclusions I drew from reading this. Again it's long, but yada yada...

...

Rhule's heavy handed coaching and administration style basically wore everybody from players to staff down hard, so much so that it was a huge sigh of relief when he was fired. Heck, even some of his own handpicked assistants seem to be tired of him or outright done with him.

We'd thought that the ones Rhule brought with him might also leave with him, but it didn't turn out that way. Obviously this didn't apply to Phil Snow, who when you consider everything we've heard comes off sounding like The Manchurian Coach (if you get that reference).

Bottom Line: The "affable nice guy" image that Rhule showed the public seems to have been a total facade.

Likewise, the "everybody agrees and gets along" image that the team has presented to the public over the last few years was a massive lie. One source's description of how Rhule would "wear everybody out until he got his way" is consistent several other things we've heard.

Charles Robinson's description of the relationship between Tepper and Rhule quickly and massively going sour sounds like it was pretty accurate. This article also confirms that Robinson's mention of how close we were to acquiring Matt Stafford was correct as well.

As Joe Person had said, the quarterback decisions were ramrodded by Rhule. Pretty clear that Rhule was all in on Darnold (more Phil Snow influence there) and then a year later wanted anybody but Darnold.

At that point, Rhule "strongly endorsed" Baker Mayfield, then put him in a "quarterback competition" that now seems even more farcical than it did at the time since Rhule's intentions were characterized by a source as being "anybody but Darnold".

Regarding Herbert, someone made the decision to not even attempt trading up. We've heard that story before, with the decision being attributed to Marty Hurney. I'm not really sure I buy that explanation anymore. Definitely sounds more like Rhule, and then maybe that story was put out there for PR purposes.

Another thing that does come off pretty clear is that our first "all defense" draft was probably pretty heavily influenced by Phil Snow. We know from previous stories that it was Snow who started the fascination with Darnold. Again, he seems to have been the angel (or devil) on Matt Rhule's shoulder.

The article mentions "a faction of people in the building" who were against drafting Herbert but doesn't go into who those people were. Sure wish it did, though I could theorize that the "faction" might have just been Rhule (maybe Snow).

In that same time frame, it's mentioned that the team was "fixated" on Teddy Bridgewater while also confirming that it was Matt Rhule's decision to dump Cam Newton. Obviously Tepper agreed to it, but I have to wonder if he would have also agreed had Rhule wanted to keep him.

Speaking of Tepper, his early notion that "football people should always be right" is just flat out stupid. As Fowler points out, even the best people in the business miss on a fair share of decisions and strategies. I'd like to hope he's figured out by now just how ridiculous that idea is. 

Tepper's fondness for checking social media is also mentioned here (I wonder if he ever ran across our infamous Dr Lunker's account).

While Rhule largely ran the quarterback decisions, it was Fitterer who made the decision on the fifth year option, with the logic being that it largely worked out to a two year deal for 11 million a year. Tepper was hesitant but "reluctantly agreed" but was later angry about how that option "hung over the franchise".

Regarding Fitterer, it sounds like his relationship with Rhule wasn't exactly harmonious. He agreed with the idea that a change of scenery might help Sam Darnold, but the article makes it sound like his support of the Baker Mayfield trade was tepid. I've said before that his own public comments in the past about drafting and developing a quarterback and his pre-Mayfield trade  description of wanting to build around Matt Corral almost made it sound like he was pleading his case. Clearly, that fell on deaf ears.

Again though, all signs point to Fitterer being safe and continuing as GM. It also sounds pretty clearly like he's not going to be stuck working under a full power head coach anymore. My guess would be he's wanted to draft a quarterback pretty much since he got here, and will finally get that chance this April. Here's hoping we get that right because we've definitely been through it over the last several years.

The article also confirms that rule had a "lottery ticket" mentality when it came to quarterbacks. He's described as having "zero patience" and apparently just expected guys to just be able to perform. That's polar opposite from Scott Fitterer's idea that you draft a quarterback and develop him. Makes me wonder if we ever would have drafted a first round quarterback with Rhule in charge.

Mayfield's poor performance following Rhule's "strong endorsement" is what ultimately sealed the coach's fate. I suppose if Mayfield were due any gratitude from us, it would be for that.

And finally, it does sound like Tepper at least has a positive opinion of Steve Wilks. His comment about Wilks having to do "an incredible job" to get consideration for the full-time gig doesn't make a lot of sense, but then we all know Tepper sucks in a press conference environment, or basically any environment where he's questioned.

It's clearer than ever before that the organization was massively dysfunctional under Matt Rhule. I'd certainly hope that we recover from that quickly but it might take some time.

Here's the condensed version.... rhule sucked... tha end.

[Mr. Scot]

5 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

Then to me that is equally as bad.  He is being a cuck if he just agrees to go alone with everything rhule wants without any input.  Why take the job then?  Ive said it before if he disagreed with any of those moves he better have spoken up against it and not try and do it in hindsight.  I think however since tepper is hands on he knows where Fitt stood with all the trades.  Henderson, darnold, baker etc.  But the 5th year option and his logic is all on fitt

What's his alternative? Start a massive internal fight and most likely lose his job? Does that really strike you as a desirable outcome?

Now Rhule's gone and Fitterer's got the power of an actual GM, so it seems pretty clear that the way he played it was much smarter.

Edited October 26, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[Mr. Scot]

7 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I see it as Fitt catering to Rhule who was beating a drum for Darnold and Mayfield (but especially Darnold).

That's pretty much how the article portrays it (Bridgewater too).

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

What's his alternative? Start a massive internal fight and most likely lose his job? Does that really strike you as a desirable outcome?

Now Rhule's gone and he's got the power of an actual GM, so it seems pretty clear that the way he did it was much smarter.

He is not going to lose his job for giving a different opinion and laying out why he doesnt like the move.  Thats not how things work dude.   

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

He is not going to lose his job for giving a different opinion and laying out why he doesnt like the move.  Thats not how things work dude.   

Where do you have any evidence that he never disagreed with Rhule?

There's actually a fair amount of indication that he did, especially when it came to the best way to get a good quarterback. Fitterer was very clearly in favor of drafting and developing.

You're basically got a preconceived notion that you won't let any evidence talk you out of.

Edited October 26, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[NorthTryon]

2 hours ago, Tbe said:

Rhule had final roster control. Not much he could have done in the end.

This is the part about fandom that is nauseating. I don't even try with the imbeciles on facebook and their tirades because we have people on here that don't know basic information. It was put out there to be common knowledge that Rhule had final roster control during his tenure and even eludes in the article to Tepper realizing that it needs to be more balanced going forward. People read this article then immediately post responses like "mAn, Fitterer sEeMs weAk tO meee and what a SpIneLEss chump" like none of them have a hierarchy or chain of command they don't routinely fall in line with at their job!

[CarolinaRideorDie]

All that this article tells us is how incompetent and toxic Rhule was. He was clearly in over his head and not capable of running an NFL team. Can't relate to players, coaches, or staff. People didn't feel free to express their wishes, made poor decisions after decisions, can't evaluate talent at the QB position. Every move Rhule made felt like a desperate move. He has set this franchise back quite a bit, his "culture" sucks. Time to move on, just glad that we don't have to suffer Rhule anymore. 

[Jackie Lee]

 

[Icdeadpeople]

4 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

 

If he would've followed the huddle... maybe he would have had some inclination