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!

     

What franchises are in worse shape than the Panthers


TheBigKat
 Share

Recommended Posts

i think we are on the ground floor working up. 

i'm not worried about the direction we're going. we'll get QB figured out. every other part is getting built with younger pieces. not much established here. we're establishing the foundation.

there's other clubs, though, that i think should be worried because they are in the process of hitting bottom for one reason or a dozen others. these are clubs i think that are in worse shape. they might have more talent, but they aren't going anywhere and they won't without an overhaul somewhere.

cowboys, jets, saints, browns, titans, giants, jaguars...lots of reason to feel hopeless for fans of those teams. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is none because we have the worst owner.

If you want to say from a talent/contract position, the Browns are in some poo for the next two seasons because of the Rapist. I don't know what's going on in Jacksonville right now. The Jets are in a similar situation to the Panthers were their owner is just awful, but he's at least old and doesn't directly meddle to the point Tepper does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Yeah. But I was responding to the comment about them being insanely talented.  More talent than us, yeah. But also overrated in the talent department. 

They have more issues than just qb.  Their defense is not good.  Their run d is giving up more ypc than we are. On pass defense, they get sacks but if they don't get to the QB, they give up big plays. They also don't run the ball well. they have several big names, but across the board, talent is lacking.

The difference is that with a relatively small amount of moves, that can potentially be turned around.  We have multiple offseasons needed to do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MasterAwesome said:

If by "reasonable" you mean "casual", then maybe.  Otherwise I don't know how a reasonable fan with any understanding of the salary cap would say our prospects are worse than the Saints.  They're basically a "win now" roster that's considerably devoid of talent, in salary cap hell, 4-7 on the season, and just lost to us a couple weeks ago.  The biggest difference is in QB, and their QB situation isn't even good.  They've got an aging below-average QB accounting for almost 20% of their salary cap next year.  And that same QB might end up being a cap casualty next year if that's even possible without incurring a massive amount of dead cap.

because it's not just a cap convo.  A reasonable person could argue.....

Last 5 seasons (Tepper era) - Panthers acquired the title of worst team in ALL of pro sports. 

Last 5 seasons - Saints have 4 winning seasons and a couple division titles.    They found ways to win w/ a broken down noodle arm Brees, the comedy trainwreck of Jameis Winston and the mehness of Carr.   They have people in charge that have won Super Bowls.    Being able to actually win and not be the literal worst in all of professsional sports....carries some legit weight in the convo. 

So in terms of top down? Saints got a HUGE edge over us with their front office. Cap situation sucks for both teams.  Saints have proven in the past to work magic on it. 

and they have a better roster today than we do.  And they got some young talent.   

No way would I say we are better off than the Saints.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, strato said:

I'll believe the Saints are cap fuged when they burn it all the way down and face a couple of seasons of vet minimums and castoffs to get their cap free again. 

That has supposedly been coming for ten years.

yep, Saints have consistently been a team that has shown the cap is smoke and mirrors for some.   

and most importantly, they have put together teams that have found ways to win and compete with meh QB.....while the Panthers boldly claimed the title of most harmless team in all of sports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are ......

 

I need to wait until the season ends.

Pats have Maye> anything panthers

Raiders have Cosby&bowers. 

Broncos if not for the douche lord Payton would be worse, but having him makes in their favor.

Browns still have 3x the talent, Myles Garrett, cubb, etc even with owning tiny towel Watson 100 million. 

Jets have a top five defense* in the past years and plenty of weapons with no terrible salary cap

Saints, you got to joking, sure the incoming cap(what 10 years running??) I hate them too, but they cover the Panthers in talent. Don't care about some fluke win.

 

 

For me it comes down to giants, titans, and jags.

 

I still struggle hard to NOT trading 53 for 53 on any of them. Titans have their better dbrowm in Simmons, he gets sacks and pressure 100x dbrown does. 

 

Just cause of a couple close wins, doesn't make the Panthers the better team. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, CRA said:

because it's not just a cap convo.  A reasonable person could argue.....

Last 5 seasons (Tepper era) - Panthers acquired the title of worst team in ALL of pro sports. 

Last 5 seasons - Saints have 4 winning seasons and a couple division titles.    They found ways to win w/ a broken down noodle arm Brees, the comedy trainwreck of Jameis Winston and the mehness of Carr.   They have people in charge that have won Super Bowls.    Being able to actually win and not be the literal worst in all of professsional sports....carries some legit weight in the convo. 

So in terms of top down? Saints got a HUGE edge over us with their front office. Cap situation sucks for both teams.  Saints have proven in the past to work magic on it. 

and they have a better roster today than we do.  And they got some young talent.   

No way would I say we are better off the the Saints.  

I guess we're talking different criteria then, if you're factoring in things like the Saints winning divisional titles in 2019 and 2020 as to why their franchise is in better shape today.  5 years is a damn lifetime in the NFL, and including that tells me you have a weak case that you feel the need to fluff.

Characterizing us having $37 million under the cap and the Saints having $77 million over the cap in 2025 as "sucks for both teams" is interesting...that's a difference of $104 million.  Ironically, the difference between us and the Patriots (who have the most cap space in 2025) is $102 million.  So I guess us and the Patriots are also both in the same "fantastic cap situation" in your words.

Look, I'm fine tossing the salary cap argument if you want, but let's be consistent at least.  Don't say the Patriots and Raiders are in fantastic cap situations, therefore giving them the edge...and then ignore the salary cap ramifications for the Saints.  Either it matters or it doesn't.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I guess we're talking different criteria then, if you're factoring in things like the Saints winning divisional titles in 2019 and 2020 as to why their franchise is in better shape today.  5 years is a damn lifetime in the NFL, and including that tells me you have a weak case that you feel the need to fluff.

Characterizing us having $37 million under the cap and the Saints having $77 million over the cap in 2025 as "sucks for both teams" is interesting...that's a difference of $104 million.  Ironically, the difference between us and the Patriots (who have the most cap space in 2025) is $102 million.  So I guess us and the Patriots are also both in the same "fantastic cap situation" in your words.

Look, I'm fine tossing the salary cap argument if you want, but let's be consistent at least.  Don't say the Patriots and Raiders are in fantastic cap situations, therefore giving them the edge...and then ignore the salary cap ramifications for the Saints.  Either it matters or it doesn't.

It's not fluffing. Having people in your FO that actually have gotten it done before is huge. And every year we all say they're gonna be in cap trouble and every year they pull out some miracle ass BS and they're not. I hate the Saints but if we could switch owners and FO right now I'd do it without hesitating. Tepper is that big of a handicap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Basbear said:

You guys are ......

 

I need to wait until the season ends.

Pats have Maye> anything panthers

Raiders have Cosby&bowers. 

Broncos if not for the douche lord Payton would be worse, but having him makes in their favor.

Browns still have 3x the talent, Myles Garrett, cubb, etc even with owning tiny towel Watson 100 million. 

Jets have a top five defense* in the past years and plenty of weapons with no terrible salary cap

Saints, you got to joking, sure the incoming cap(what 10 years running??) I hate them too, but they cover the Panthers in talent. Don't care about some fluke win.

 

 

For me it comes down to giants, titans, and jags.

 

I still struggle hard to NOT trading 53 for 53 on any of them. Titans have their better dbrowm in Simmons, he gets sacks and pressure 100x dbrown does. 

 

Just cause of a couple close wins, doesn't make the Panthers the better team. 

 

 

lol nick Chubb?

 

Classic case of overrating other team’s players because the grass is always greener. Chubb hasn’t even been on the field. Hubbard is a better player, you just don’t like him because he doesn’t have the media pedigree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...