Panthers will bring Tetairoa in for a visit

[LinvilleGorge]

I was a top performing sales rep at every company I worked at. I didn't do half of the forecasting and analysis work of most of the other sales reps because I didn't need to. I focused on what moved the needle and ignored the noise. Just because someone doesn't get bogged down on the tedious elements of their role doesn't mean that they lack work ethic or whatever bullshit. Football is like sales, all that matters at the end of the day is the results that you produce. Everything else is just noise and the people that don't produce try to hide their lack of production by appearing to work super hard. That doesn't impress me. Put up numbers. Period. Nothing else matters 

[Tr3ach]

36 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I was a top performing sales rep at every company I worked at. I didn't do half of the forecasting and analysis work of most of the other sales reps because I didn't need to. I focused on what moved the needle and ignored the noise. Just because someone doesn't get bogged down on the tedious elements of their role doesn't mean that they lack work ethic or whatever bullshit. Football is like sales, all that matters at the end of the day is the results that you produce. Everything else is just noise and the people that don't produce try to hide their lack of production by appearing to work super hard. That doesn't impress me. Put up numbers. Period. Nothing else matters 

I don't think your analogy works exactly.   Yes results are all that matters in the end, but these are the best of the best going against one another.   Any tiny advantage you can get can make a huge difference.

[LinvilleGorge]

13 minutes ago, Tr3ach said:

I don't think your analogy works exactly.   Yes results are all that matters in the end, but these are the best of the best going against one another.   Any tiny advantage you can get can make a huge difference.

The analogy holds. You're just stuck on a viewpoint that doesn't allow you to see it. There's just not that much for most positions to know. WR isn't QB. A WR needs to be able to recognize coverage and know what to do on options routes. That's honestly about it. He's better off spending extra time on the field refining his route running than watching more film. If he doesn't want to do that now you have real red flags.

[PNW_PantherMan]

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The analogy holds. You're just stuck on a viewpoint that doesn't allow you to see it. There's just not that much for most positions to know. WR isn't QB. A WR needs to be able to recognize coverage and know what to do on options routes. That's honestly about it. He's better off spending extra time on the field refining his route running than watching more film. If he doesn't want to do that now you have real red flags.

I agree, but for me it's the whole picture.  A big receiver that lives off contested catches in college that doesn't love football.  Sounds like the next guy in line to bust at WR for the Panthers.

Just go defense at 8.

[tukafan21]

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The analogy holds. You're just stuck on a viewpoint that doesn't allow you to see it. There's just not that much for most positions to know. WR isn't QB. A WR needs to be able to recognize coverage and know what to do on options routes. That's honestly about it. He's better off spending extra time on the field refining his route running than watching more film. If he doesn't want to do that now you have real red flags.

Exactly

WR is the least important position for watching film, and there is even an argument that them watching too much film to study tendencies COULD actually be a hinderance to the team.

NFL QB's don't throw the ball to open WR's, they throw the ball to a spot where they expect the WR to be when the ball gets there.

If WR's are out there trying to make decisions on the fly based on what they are seeing, then it greatly increases the chances of them and the QB not being on the same page and leading to INT's because the QB threw the ball expecting the WR to run his route and he broke it off into something else because of what he expected the defense to do.

It's why QB's need to be the massive film watchers, because it's on them to then see what the whole defense is doing and make the right choice as to which player to throw the ball to, as he knows exactly where his WR is going based on the play/route called.

Every other position needs film study more, linemen need it to study tendencies, running back's need it to predict what the defense is doing to know where the hole will open up, defensive players need to recognize the play the offense is trying to run.

But WR's, they need to run exactly where the QB is expecting them to, which is the play call, not what they see on the fly.  Yes, there are option routes, but those aren't dictated by what they are seeing on film, but what the defender is doing in the moment.  As in, if they're shading you this direction, you go that way, or if they are in Cover 2 vs Zone, you do this or that.

Those aren't things you need extensive film study to do, they're general hard and fast rules that apply to any team you're playing.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I agree, but for me it's the whole picture.  A big receiver that lives off contested catches in college that doesn't love football.  Sounds like the next guy in line to bust at WR for the Panthers.

Just go defense at 8.

Not loving watching film at a position that doesn't require a ton of film study doesn't necessarily equate to not loving football. I loved sales but I hated the bullshit of forecasting and analysis that wasn't helping me hit my numbers and was just forced on me by dinosaur management that thought that doing those things was required to excel and that there was a one size fits all approach to success.

[tukafan21]

3 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I agree, but for me it's the whole picture.  A big receiver that lives off contested catches in college that doesn't love football.  Sounds like the next guy in line to bust at WR for the Panthers.

Just go defense at 8.

So a player needs to love watching football in their free time to love playing it?

I love golf, but I hate watching it on TV.

You're making an extrapolation based on an off handed comment from a few years ago, it's a massive leap to say he doesn't love football from that.

[MHS831]

1 hour ago, TD alt said:

Why are some of y'all discounting the part where he said he doesn't like watching it by himself because he watches it with coaches and the receiver group? The fact is is that since that video, he's been as productive as ever. His stats are more indicative than a 2023 vid regarding his efficacy as a pro receiver. 

You bring up good points that could be looked into more carefully. 

I heard what he said--you have gym rats and film rats--and they are the people who are willing to do more than they need to do instead of what they are merely required to do.  Stats?  Yes.  They beat New Mexico, Northern Arizona, Utah, and Houston.  They were playing from behind (passing) vs. non starters quite a bit.

He had a 300-yard game against New Mexico. A 200-yard game vs. a weak WVU team (6-6) during which they were playing from behind (passing more).  Impressive, nonetheless.

• However, how did he do vs. Colorado and Hunter at CB?  38 yards.  Maybe he should have watched more film.
• What about the big rivalry game vs. ASU at the end of the season?  68 yards.
• What about the big win vs. Houston, a team that was ranked 10th at the time?  50 yards. 
• Brigham Young was ranked 14th when they played.  78 yards. 

these are not bad numbers, but against the top teams, he was pretty pedestrian.  To me, that is why you watch film--you watch for tells or mistakes your opponent makes--you look to find some way to beat your opponent. 

His stats were good, but if you take out the two games vs. bad teams, (over 500 yards) he averaged about 80 yards per game on a team that was throwing a lot because they were behind a lot.

If you look at the game where he was facing the equivalent of a #1 CB in the NFL, he got shut down. 

 

[LinvilleGorge]

4 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

You bring up good points that could be looked into more carefully. 

I heard what he said--you have gym rats and film rats--and they are the people who are willing to do more than they need to do instead of what they are merely required to do.  Stats?  Yes.  They beat New Mexico, Northern Arizona, Utah, and Houston.  They were playing from behind (passing) vs. non starters quite a bit.

He had a 300-yard game against New Mexico. A 200-yard game vs. a weak WVU team (6-6) during which they were playing from behind (passing more).  Impressive, nonetheless.

• However, how did he do vs. Colorado and Hunter at CB?  38 yards.  Maybe he should have watched more film.
• What about the big rivalry game vs. ASU at the end of the season?  68 yards.
• What about the big win vs. Houston, a team that was ranked 10th at the time?  50 yards. 
• Brigham Young was ranked 14th when they played.  78 yards. 

these are not bad numbers, but against the top teams, he was pretty pedestrian.  To me, that is why you watch film--you watch for tells or mistakes your opponent makes--you look to find some way to beat your opponent. 

His stats were good, but if you take out the two games vs. bad teams, (over 500 yards) he averaged about 80 yards per game on a team that was throwing a lot because they were behind a lot.

If you look at the game where he was facing the equivalent of a #1 CB in the NFL, he got shut down. 

 

Did you watch that Colorado game? I did. Despite being blown out Arizona ran the ball 34 times to only 26 passing attempts. Why? Because their OL absolutely could not protect the QB. They gave up more sacks (7) than they had in their six games prior to that one. It's hard to complete passes from your back or while you're running for your life and that was what they were dealing with in that game. Its like when Greg Olsen only had 4 catches for 41 yards and 0 TDs on 9 targets in SB50. Yeah, if you're just looking at the boxscore you might say that he got shutdown but if you actually watched the game you'd never talk about that because of the overall situation in the game. It wasn't that simple.

[MHS831]

13 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

So a player needs to love watching football in their free time to love playing it?

I love golf, but I hate watching it on TV.

You're making an extrapolation based on an off handed comment from a few years ago, it's a massive leap to say he doesn't love football from that.

It is a leap--but we have to read the tea leaves.  Think job interview, not golf.  If he said, "I never watch football on TV and I only watch film when I have to..."  That does not suggest a love for football.  Maybe he loves playing football--you are right--but the tea leaves say he does not.  My son never watched basketball on TV and liked playing it.  As a sophomore, playing on varsity, he was all-county as a 5-11 forward.  So I get it.  It baffled me.  I wonder if Dan Morgan watched film?  I wonder if he watched football on TV?  How much can you love football if it only interests you when you are playing?  I see it as a red flag--but you could be right--but if I am spending a first round pick and millions on a player, this would bother me. 

 

[tukafan21]

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

You bring up good points that could be looked into more carefully. 

I heard what he said--you have gym rats and film rats--and they are the people who are willing to do more than they need to do instead of what they are merely required to do.  Stats?  Yes.  They beat New Mexico, Northern Arizona, Utah, and Houston.  They were playing from behind (passing) vs. non starters quite a bit.

He had a 300-yard game against New Mexico. A 200-yard game vs. a weak WVU team (6-6) during which they were playing from behind (passing more).  Impressive, nonetheless.

• However, how did he do vs. Colorado and Hunter at CB?  38 yards.  Maybe he should have watched more film.
• What about the big rivalry game vs. ASU at the end of the season?  68 yards.
• What about the big win vs. Houston, a team that was ranked 10th at the time?  50 yards. 
• Brigham Young was ranked 14th when they played.  78 yards. 

these are not bad numbers, but against the top teams, he was pretty pedestrian.  To me, that is why you watch film--you watch for tells or mistakes your opponent makes--you look to find some way to beat your opponent. 

His stats were good, but if you take out the two games vs. bad teams, (over 500 yards) he averaged about 80 yards per game on a team that was throwing a lot because they were behind a lot.

If you look at the game where he was facing the equivalent of a #1 CB in the NFL, he got shut down. 

 

lol, I love when people make posts like this.

First things first, people keep pointing to the Colorado game and "what he did vs Hunter" so I'll keep pointing out that Hunter barely even played in that game because he was injured, was in and out in the first half and didn't play a snap in the 2nd half.  This was brought up a week or two ago and I think it was that T-Mac was targeted 5 times when Hunter was in coverage, catching 3 of them as well as drawing a pass interference call on him too.

Beyond that, it's also just disingenuous to point to that game this year when we had a terrible coaching staff and our QB played terribly all year, while ignoring the 9 rec, 107 yards, and TD that he put up against Colorado the year before when Hunter was healthy and played the full game, including the TD catch being in 1 on 1 coverage against Hunter.

That big ASU rivalry game where he only had 68 yards (and a TD btw)?

Okay, so if I give you that game, do I then get to count the 11 rec, 266 yards, and TD that he had in the game against ASU in 2023?

He played 15 games against ranked teams in his 3 years and had 90 rec, 1,227 yards, 9 TDs.

Which means during his college career, he averaged 82 yards per game against ranked teams, and you happened to conveniently call out 3 games where he had less than that average and a game that didn't even play out in the way you are insinuating it did.

[Lame Duck]

Do not go down the rabbit hole.  TMac is a baller.  Most people do not wake up and go “fug yea, can’t wait until I sit in my cube for the next 10 hours!” but people do it cause they want to get paid.  Football players are no different.

[La Pantera]

I don’t put a lot into the ‘not watching film’ controversy. He was a freshman, just shooting the poo. 
 

but with that said, I still see him as a possession-50/50 jump ball guy. With questions about his ability to separate at the pro level.

[MHS831]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Did you watch that Colorado game? I did. Despite being blown out Arizona ran the ball 34 times to only 26 passing attempts. Why? Because their OL absolutely could not protect the QB. They gave up more sacks (7) than they had in their six games prior to that one. It's hard to complete passes from your back or while you're running for your life and that was what they were dealing with in that game. Its like when Greg Olsen only had 4 catches for 41 yards and 0 TDs on 9 targets in SB50. Yeah, if you're just looking at the boxscore you might say that he got shutdown but if you actually watched the game you'd never talk about that because of the overall situation in the game. It wasn't that simple.

No, and you have good points--however, part of his appeal is the 50/50 ball--how he wins those--when pressured it would seem that the QB would rely on a tall WR who can grab those passes--but I can't say that I saw the game.  However, the original post presented stats--so I used stats to analyze his effectiveness in big games and against top level CB play.  It is a team sport and when you struggle, it is rarely just you, as is the case when you have a 300-yard day.  So if you use stats to present your case, I will examine the stats.