I thought Clausen looked good...

[Jpjr]

So you can seriously say right now that Clausen has no chance of being a good QB for this team?

Statistically speaking he was dead even with Carson Palmer yesterday. That meant that on some level something other than QB play was responsible for the Bengals scoring 20 and the Panthers scoring 7.

If the Bengals scored 20 because thier experienced QB was lighting it up in the same dreary conditions, then I'd put more of the loss on Clausen. That simply wasn't the case.

Doesn't mean he didn't suck, but I don't think it's fair if people imply he cost the Panther's the game this time.

[Peppers90 NC]

Statistically speaking he was dead even with Carson Palmer yesterday. That meant that on some level something other than QB play was responsible for the Bengals scoring 20 and the Panthers scoring 7.

If the Bengals scored 20 because thier experienced QB was lighting it up in the same dreary conditions, then I'd put more of the loss on Clausen. That simply wasn't the case.

Doesn't mean he didn't suck, but I don't think it's fair if people imply he cost the Panther's the game this time.

This is true, but the main subject is people are already saying we have to look elsewhere before the kid even has a chance to prove himself.

[Zod]

So you can seriously say right now that Clausen has no chance of being a good QB for this team?

Anyone who would even attempt to say that is the laughing stock of this site right now. Talk about clueless.

[Jpjr]

This is true, but the main subject is people are already saying we have to look elsewhere before the kid even has a chance to prove himself.

Yes that is the dumbest thing you could possibly do.

The smartest thing they could do is what the Jets did and put in an old timer like Brunnell who can come in if necessary but really doesn't want to..

[rayzor]

Anyone who would even attempt to say that is the laughing stock of this site right now. Talk about clueless.

hey zod,

i know the team was probably pretty pissed at the whole game but could you get any sense of how they felt clausen was doing out there or how they were reacting to him on the sidelines?

[MadHatter]

Matt improved from his first game and you know that whether you want to admitt it or not. His performance last week was better than Jimmy's. Despite his awful performance he was still able to find Smith and score 2 touchdowns.

Despite this "better" QB play, Jimmy has none. In the end that is what matters.

Seems like you want to continue to perpetuate a line of thought that's incorrect around here to begin with: Giving a rookie more credit than he should get or deserve. Period.

The fact is this offense is no better off. And I'm pretty sure I'm not one of the "few". There are a few folks who see it the way it is. Here's another fact, Jimmy also doesn't have a more hyped back-up breathing down his back....if he didn't have the name and he was in Matt's shoes he would have gotten benched at half time after 6 yards of total passing offense.

I WAS a huge MM fan. I was not overly excited about the Clausen pick (wanted a WR). But, Clausen looks way more poised than MM and will be the real deal.

You sir, do not have a clue what you are talking about.

[MadHatter]

We lost that game because of the fumbles....plain and simple.

[DaveThePanther2008]

Clausen said he wasn't nervous I don't believe it at all.

Our defense is playing better and given some rest we might start performing better.

I personally think Clausen did well for his 1st game. Fumbles by Stewart and Goodson sunk our second half come back.

[Mr. Scot]

Worth remembering that, unless he signs someone else, Fox can't afford to be too tough on Moore at this point either.

Suppose Clausen gets hurt? Would you want to have to call on Moore to start again after having said "he stinks" or some such?

[PantherFanForLife]

Anyone who would even attempt to say that is the laughing stock of this site right now. Talk about clueless.

Yes, and that is your biggest "proof" of that "fact", isn't it Zod? It's what you rely on. As do a lot of others. The fact that the majority - perhaps not even majority, but let's say the most popular spokespeople that actually post - of THIS site, agrees.

The day that becomes "fact" is the day you will see me not get into so many arguments here. Fortunately it's not, and most times all it means is that the majority of the populars here agree, but that doesn't make them right. In the real world that's never been true, nor will it ever.

It just means there's a couple of "clueless" "crazy" loons, that don't know what they are talking about.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(Actually, they do, it's just that their opinion is different, and they refuse to conform and submitt to popular opinion if they believe they have a point, with facts to back them up. This creates problems for those "regulars" that like their word to be taken as "fact" or "more correct" than the rest, so the best way to deal with these people is in the following manner:

1. Try to dimsiss them.

2. Laugh or make jokes to discredit them. Hope another regular joins in to back you up

3. Attempt to bash them or use the gang mentality: Frustrate, ridicule, and gang up while enforcing point 1&2 in the hopes that they give up and you can get rid of them.

5. Attempt to do it when they are not around, and create a notorius name for the said character.

6. Hope to push them over the edge to the point where they lose their temper, break rules.

7. Ban them.

8. Later, after they are gone, much later, you can begin considering their points. If it turns out they were right, you can safely begin spreading or stealthy agreeing with the same arguments you were against.

9. You are still the man that knows what he's talking about.

10. Rinse and Repeat.

Typical forum 10 step operating procedures and manipulation techniques 101)

[top dawg]

Now, let me ask you a question. Putting things in perspective, and looking at how the game was played yesterday, and taking expectations into account, who was really the better QB?

Palmer had better protection, a better group of receivers, and better play calling, and yet he should have had 3 INTs against a defense that isn't playing too well.

Talk about Jimmy all you want, but at least we don't have Palmer.

[top dawg]

Yes, and that is your biggest "proof" of that "fact", isn't it Zod? It's what you rely on. As do a lot of others. The fact that the majority - perhaps not even majority, but let's say the most popular spokespeople that actually post - of THIS site, agrees.

The day that becomes "fact" is the day you will see me not get into so many arguments here. Fortunately it's not, and most times all it means is that the majority of the populars here agree, but that doesn't make them right. In the real world that's never been true, nor will it ever.

It just means there's a couple of "clueless" "crazy" loons, that don't know what they are talking about.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(Actually, they do, it's just that their opinion is different, and they refuse to conform and submitt to popular opinion if they believe they have a point, with facts to back them up. This creates problems for those "regulars" that like their word to be taken as "fact" or "more correct" than the rest, so the best way to deal with these people is in the following manner:

1. Try to dimsiss them.

2. Laugh or make jokes to discredit them. Hope another regular joins in to back you up

3. Attempt to bash them or use the gang mentality: Frustrate, ridicule, and gang up while enforcing point 1&2 in the hopes that they give up and you can get rid of them.

5. Attempt to do it when they are not around, and create a notorius name for the said character.

6. Hope to push them over the edge to the point where they lose their temper, break rules.

7. Ban them.

8. Later, after they are gone, much later, you can begin considering their points. If it turns out they were right, you can safely begin spreading or stealthy agreeing with the same arguments you were against.

9. You are still the man that knows what he's talking about.

10. Rinse and Repeat.

Typical forum 10 step operating procedures and manipulation techniques 101)

Chillax, man. I totally agree with everyone's right to have an opinion, but I don't agree that Clausen doesn't look better than Moore. Like someone alluded to in another thread, Clausen seems to have more pocket awareness, pocket presence, mobility, and a quicker release than Moore. He certainly seems more accurate. The mistakes that he made were more of a rookie thing than anything else. It seems to me, and always has, that Moore is the one who got more credit than he deserved. Hell, he even got a payday out of it. But when you put things in perspective, and look at expectations, Clausen is arguably ahead of the curve, where Moore basically just came up too short.

But if you disagree, then we'll just agree to disagree. Moreover, you have to know that we all have had our times in the Huddle, but conspiracy theories are a bit out there. Some agree, and some disagree.

[PantherFanForLife]

Chillax, man. I totally agree with everyone's right to have an opinion, but I don't agree that Clausen doesn't look better than Moore. Like someone alluded to in another thread, Clausen seems to have more pocket awareness, pocket presence, mobility, and a quicker release than Moore. He certainly seems more accurate. The mistakes that he made were more of a rookie thing than anything else. It seems to me, and always has, that Moore is the one who got more credit than he deserved. Hell, he even got a payday out of it. But when you put things in perspective, and look at expectations, Clausen is arguably ahead of the curve, where Moore basically just came up too short.

But if you disagree, then we'll just agree to disagree. Moreover, you have to know that we all have had our times in the Huddle, but conspiracy theories are a bit out there. Some agree, and some disagree.

Ok first. I agree. Clausen at times had looked better and shown more promise than Matt. Never argued that point.

That wasn't the point though. The point was so far the best offense and QB play we have had this year, was Matt's second game. I can't possibly agree with him getting more credit than he deserves 'cause around here he hardly got any. In fact that's my problem. Matt's second game was an improvement over the first yet he got benched. Most don't want to admitt that.

Second, Jimmy played no better on Sunday than Matt did during his second game. He played worse, imo and the numbers along with a few other factors back that up. Does he get an excuse cause he's a rookie? Sure. But that doesn't change that overall he didn't play any better with this team, but actually slightly worse. However here, Matt's improved performance is nonexistent, and Matt's playing during his second game is lumped in with the first as terrible(because he had a very poor first game) but Jimmy's first game is considered good. Hipocrasy? Absolutely.

Furthermore, even though Matt has proven he can be a consistent winner, by winning 4 out of 5 games last year, and also showing improvement this year from his first to second game, he can't possibly be given the benefit of the doubt for having a bad season opener, or the potential and possibility of improving throughout the season. Around here Jimmy's the only one that can improve while Matt wasn't going to do any better.

Last but not least. That's no conspiracy theory. It's pretty common practice. Zod is a popular guy here. That's fact. At one point he probably did a whole bunch of homework and made a name for himself by making good arguments backed up by facts. I'm sure he still does, although from what I see, not always backed up by true facts anymore. The less informed guys looked to him for answers on specific matters. Eventually you make a name for yourself. You become the spokesperson of the majority. Problem is you have to handle it and you want to keep it. And sometimes you in return have to back a general opinion, that even you know deep down, you don't 100% support, because otherwise you risk losing your "fan" support, shall I say. You even join in trying to discredit folks(see his initial response to that guy). After awhile the chore of staying on top of things, digging up facts, and so on becomes pretty mundane. Sometimes you just want to state your personal opinion and have people support it, rather than take a true objective stand on the matter. So you do.

And to give you another pratical example of the gang mentality, I am of the opinion that Matt got benched early, probably shouldn't have but now that he did, I think Jimmy should remain the starter because consistency is the best thing you can give this team, and it's a great way of seeing what Jimmy has to offer. I actually SUPPORT Jimmy being our starting QB and believe one of the worst thigns we can do is bench him now.

Now that attitude isn't exactly that "100% behind Jimmy he's our guy type attitude". It's a harsh I'm not impressed yet. I want to see something before I start waving the Jimmy flag.

So what happens? The steps above happen. To the point, where people will take what I said, push it to the extremes, especially when I am not around and turn it into something that can hopefully make me lose credibility.

Example: PantherFanForLife wants Moore to start.

Reality: The above is 100% false. The person writing that even knows that. He's trying to re-create and spin an opinion that is based on sound thought into something that even more people would consider outrageous. It was only stated to accomplish one or more of the tasks I pointed out above.

Good night.

[Zod]

Yes, and that is your biggest "proof" of that "fact", isn't it Zod? It's what you rely on. As do a lot of others. The fact that the majority - perhaps not even majority, but let's say the most popular spokespeople that actually post - of THIS site, agrees.

The day that becomes "fact" is the day you will see me not get into so many arguments here. Fortunately it's not, and most times all it means is that the majority of the populars here agree, but that doesn't make them right. In the real world that's never been true, nor will it ever.

It just means there's a couple of "clueless" "crazy" loons, that don't know what they are talking about.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(Actually, they do, it's just that their opinion is different, and they refuse to conform and submitt to popular opinion if they believe they have a point, with facts to back them up. This creates problems for those "regulars" that like their word to be taken as "fact" or "more correct" than the rest, so the best way to deal with these people is in the following manner:

1. Try to dimsiss them.

2. Laugh or make jokes to discredit them. Hope another regular joins in to back you up

3. Attempt to bash them or use the gang mentality: Frustrate, ridicule, and gang up while enforcing point 1&2 in the hopes that they give up and you can get rid of them.

5. Attempt to do it when they are not around, and create a notorius name for the said character.

6. Hope to push them over the edge to the point where they lose their temper, break rules.

7. Ban them.

8. Later, after they are gone, much later, you can begin considering their points. If it turns out they were right, you can safely begin spreading or stealthy agreeing with the same arguments you were against.

9. You are still the man that knows what he's talking about.

10. Rinse and Repeat.

Typical forum 10 step operating procedures and manipulation techniques 101)

Funny when I mention the biggest laughing stock on this site you automatically assume the post was directed towards you? Interesting indeed....