so are we done with the "answer is on the roster" era?

[WhoKnows]

I thought the answer is on the roster was Ron’s philosophy, which with always promoting from within extended to coaching.

[kungfoodude]

5 hours ago, rayzor said:

Yeah....we still have BY at QB, but it seems like we've moved past that for the most part. Still not sure why Ian Thomas is still around aside from being an OK blocker, but this coaching staff and FO seem intent on getting in here who they think fits their idea and aren't afraid of letting go of people who don't.

Good example is what they did in the secondary with waivers. They worked hard with a crew of DBs through training camp and preseason and then figured that we'd just rather go a different direction.

You may not like the choices, but the fact that they aren't sitting back and just trying to make it work with whoever we got and are intent on doing what we can to make the roster better.

We aren't a team resting on its pathetic laurels. We have a team that is, instead, actively working to get better and taking every opportunity to make that happen, even if it means giving up on guys like TMJ.

I'm not saying that the team is fixed or we've got all the answers, but I am saying that we're working towards and getting it figured out.

I think that is a TBD. We aren't that removed from the "in on every deal" era which was the most roster mismanaged era in franchise history.

COULD we have turned the corner? Sure. But, this is also basically the same crew that has us where we are now in terms of the NFL's least talented roster.

We will see what happens. Never count any chickens as a Panthers fan.

[jayboogieman]

4 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

Those that are not cutting it are replaced

[Carolina Cajun]

5 hours ago, mccjeff said:

I think they figured out that “the answer is on the roster” didn’t necessarily mean our roster. It be the answer is on someone else’s roster 

I think to an extent it was the old mentality.  With Rivera, he was a players coach and if you were a back of the roster guy, Ron would tell them "If something happens, you're the next man up, I believe in you", that only goes as far as the talent you actually have on the roster.  Rhule was the same, but he did the college "Rah rah" poo that got his guys on the roster and no matter what they werent going anywhere.  Reich was just trash, CTE is a helluva drug.  Now with Morgan and Canales, it seems like they are taking the modern nfl approach of Not For Long.  Youre not competing with the other guys on this roster, you're competing with every single other player in the league.  Our DBs clearly showed they didnt cut the mustard and this was a HUGE wakeup call for every single player on our roster regardless of position.  Be better or be cut.

[Jon Snow]

34 minutes ago, jayboogieman said:

He will probably be here for another decade. This one nobody can explain. 

[BIGH2001]

51 minutes ago, WhoKnows said:

I thought the answer is on the roster was Ron’s philosophy, which with always promoting from within extended to coaching.

More of a Gettleman/Fox/Hurney thing. The answer is on the roster was definitely not Fitterer’s philosophy either, except when it came to stupidly not trading Burns. 

[kungfoodude]

1 hour ago, BIGH2001 said:

More of a Gettleman/Fox/Hurney thing. The answer is on the roster was definitely not Fitterer’s philosophy either, except when it came to stupidly not trading Burns. 

Burns was just overplaying your hand. You bought low, didn't sell high but couldn't let it go waiting for peak value again.

[Pejorative Miscreant]

7 hours ago, mccjeff said:

I think they figured out that “the answer is on the roster” didn’t necessarily mean our roster. It be the answer is on someone else’s roster 

Based on the current pace of rebuild, the answer is a 9th grader that just started playing JV football. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

2 hours ago, Jon Snow said:

He will probably be here for another decade. This one nobody can explain. 

Watch him be our next GM

[hepcat]

I’m not sure what this team’s mantra would even be at this point aside from inept. The answer is always wrong is more like it 

[strato]

Free year afaic. Showing me something is much better than not, but they still get a year to get things figured out. In my fantasy 'I'm in charge' world.

I'm definitely optimistic for the first time since they rejected Wilks, and it isn't because of the players. 

[45catfan]

The answer hasn't been on our roster approaching a decade.  Damn that's sad.

[Donald LaFell]

Just happy to trend up. I don’t think Bryce is the answer but maybe Canales can prove to be and the team can look better and better. 

[TD alt]

17 hours ago, csx said:

Not the answer buy maybe better depth

I would agree most years, and I'm not neglecting current injuries (which may be indicative of our aggressive nature on the wire), but I simply don't think that we are set in our minds on the starter opposite Horn, Clowney, or our LB corps. I seriously think that there is a great possibility that we could find waiver wire guys as our preferred starters once they are up to speed (which I'm assuming will be no later than the end of September).