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!

     

Great article Gantt

Squirrel

By Squirrel,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Wither Newbie

Wither

Posted
Posted

Stopped reading right thar.

I thought this season proved that it DOES matter :yesnod:

Yeah that statement was careless. Sure we have a great running game but we sure as hell don't want to see eight men in a box all season - ala Delhomme.

I counted five of you saying the same thing.

If you remember, the problem with Delhomme wasn't necessarily making plays, it was the turnovers. That's what killed the Panthers. They could've conceivably won more games had there not been so many turnovers.

I don't really like Gantt but you are all latching onto one statement in order to dislike the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blackcatgrowl Newbie

blackcatgrowl

Posted
Posted

They endured abysmal quarterback play for the first half of the year, and then turned to a guy no one knew what to expect from. They came through it OK.

Came through it OK?

A 4-1 record is not "ok". It's great!

A backup QB with almost a 98.7 rating, 8TDs and 1 Int in 5 starts isn't "ok", it's awesome!

Too bad we can't put Fox on injured reserve next year...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AceMan Experienced

AceMan

Posted
Posted

I counted five of you saying the same thing.

If you remember, the problem with Delhomme wasn't necessarily making plays, it was the turnovers. That's what killed the Panthers. They could've conceivably won more games had there not been so many turnovers.

I don't really like Gantt but you are all latching onto one statement in order to dislike the article.

Delhomme was the one creating all those turnovers though. The margin is too different for when Moore came in. They could've conceivably won more games had Delhomme not been in those games.

I like the article, but that part is completely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wither Newbie

Wither

Posted
Posted

Delhomme was the one creating all those turnovers though. The margin is too different for when Moore came in. They could've conceivably won more games had Delhomme not been in those games.

I like the article, but that part is completely wrong.

It's not that anyone was wrong, it was that people seemed to be latching onto that statement in order to denounce the entire article (and I got the impression some meant he wasn't making plays - maybe someone said it outright, dunno, didn't re-read the posts after this post).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raskle Contributor

Raskle

Posted
Posted

Ok, maybe I read it differently than most of you guys have, but it seemed to me that Gantt was saying that if one of our start players or our HC leave, we'd still be a contender. One person does not make this team, and that is a good thing. Can you imagine how good the Ravens would be without Ray Lewis? Or the Colts without Manning?

We proved this year that a QB change can be a good thing, and that if Pep walks we'd be hurting a little, but not completely inept like most outsiders would think. I liked the article and think we're better than "one player (or even multiple people) leaving could cause collapse," which is not true about half the teams out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Squirrel Collaborator

Squirrel

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ok, maybe I read it differently than most of you guys have, but it seemed to me that Gantt was saying that if one of our start players or our HC leave, we'd still be a contender. One person does not make this team, and that is a good thing. Can you imagine how good the Ravens would be without Ray Lewis? Or the Colts without Manning?

We proved this year that a QB change can be a good thing, and that if Pep walks we'd be hurting a little, but not completely inept like most outsiders would think. I liked the article and think we're better than "one player (or even multiple people) leaving could cause collapse," which is not true about half the teams out there.

Thats what I got from the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

Ok, maybe I read it differently than most of you guys have, but it seemed to me that Gantt was saying that if one of our start players or our HC leave, we'd still be a contender. One person does not make this team, and that is a good thing. Can you imagine how good the Ravens would be without Ray Lewis? Or the Colts without Manning?

We proved this year that a QB change can be a good thing, and that if Pep walks we'd be hurting a little, but not completely inept like most outsiders would think. I liked the article and think we're better than "one player (or even multiple people) leaving could cause collapse," which is not true about half the teams out there.

Thats what I got from the article.
that's what i got as well and i agree with it but it's a different slant on things than he has had for a while.

if seemed like he was trying to fight for jake's and fox's jobs...that losing them would be harmful to the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
Posted

that's what i got as well and i agree with it but it's a different slant on things than he has had for a while.

if seemed like he was trying to fight for jake's and fox's jobs...that losing them would be harmful to the team.

i got the same thing

good read

he's learning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • strato
      Schrader / Jeremiah mock draft experiment

      By strato · Posted

      We have taken two TEs in three seasons I think, and Sanders may not pan out or it may have been a sophomore slump, but we took a guy last year that was coming on.  I am not in favor of TE in round one and really don’t consider it a high priority in any round. 
    • XClown1986
      Draft intel from ESPN’s Jordan Reid

      By XClown1986 · Posted

      Trevon Moehrig, Turk Wharton, Bobby Brown, Jaelen Phillips, Devin Lloyd, Nic Scourton Giving him 6 starters in 2 offseasons that cost boat loads of money or a 2nd round pick... Not exactly handing the man scraps. The point of the draft is to make the team better. You want to make this about Bryce. It isn't. It's about improving the team. And if anyone can look at our offense and go "we're good", they are lying to themselves. You give quarterbacks weapons. We SCREAMED for YEARS to give Cam some help. But now because we are trying to do it for Bryce, you all are saying we are coddling him because of his "deficiencies". It's a double-standard because you don't like the guy, clearly. But even if he does fail, guess what? The next guy has help too. Win-win.
    • mrcompletely11
      Draft intel from ESPN’s Jordan Reid

      By mrcompletely11 · Posted

      we have 2 solid/above average (however you want to phrase that) wr's, which is more than half the league at least.  We dont need to be blowing more first round capital just to placate Bryce and his limitations.   We have one absolute stud (probably top 10 wr) in tmac and we have a high floor guy with insane potential if he can stay healthy.  Yeah man we are in better shape than the bulk of the teams in the league.  If you need to add some speed or whatever, sure draft in the mid rounds or wait until tc cuts.  Its monumentally stupid to spend 3 straight firsts on a wr if thats the route they go.  ITs just more and more excuses for Bryce, thats where we are at now.    "How can bryce succeed without a big possession type wr (drafts 2 for him), how is bryce supposed to exceed without a speed guy......."   Its fuging never ending.  Give EE some goddamn help on defense for once
×
×
  • Create New...