Jaws: "I wouldn't give up on Jimmy"

[CRA]

You don't have to see the future. Jimmy Clausen will not turn into Tom Brady by 2011. LaFell will not be Larry Fitzgerald in his prime in 2011. Otah will not be Otah in his prime in 2011. Smith will not be Smith in his prime in 2011.

It's common sense.

And I will make a bet with anyone, if we DON'T make some serious acquisitions on offense in the off-season this year, then ball control offense is what you will have next year!

No one here has ever implied that....you don't need that to field a pretty dang good offense.

look at 2008.

[Mr. Scot]

Actually, in reality it really doesn't. His "opinion" is 80% politically correct and 20% truth every time he gets on that podium just like any other coach.

Seriously, stop pointing to what a coach says in public and press conferences and say look "there's evidence" about his philosophy! That's what he really believes.

Rule #1: You never bad mouth your players in front of the media.

You will never get an honest assessment of what a coach thinks about a team in a press conference. The only guys that ever hear what he really thinks are his other assistant coaches, the GM and his owner...IN PRIVATE MEETINGS!

Because there is nothing in the history of coach speak (any coach) to think he's giving anything but a generic statement to the press. He's being optimistic and doing his PR best. What any coach says this time of year means little.

Uh huh :sosp:

Admit it. Neither of you guys has listened to any of the media that's come out since Rivera was hired, have you?

Granted, there's certainly no rule that says you have to, but if you want to bring an informed opinion into the discussion, listening to what the head coach has to say definitely helps.

Will tell you this much. You can't measure Rivera by the previous coach. He's certainly not out there giving away trade secrets and game plans, but if you listen to the presser and the interviews, you'll learn quickly that Ron Rivera is not John Fox.

[PantherFanForLife]

No one here has ever implied that....you don't need that to field a pretty dang good offense.

look at 2008.

Perhaps you missed the point. Again the comment I made was about a ball control offense. In 2008, we were a ball control offense. We were not, have never been, and will not be an attacking style, aggressive offense in 2011. Probably never will be as long as this FO continues to refuse to go after big name offensive players.

The best we have ever been was an overachieving ball control offense. I never claimed we could not have a good offense. Ball control offense doesn't mean bad offense. It means conservative offense.

I think some of you are thinking I'm implying we will have a bad offense, and that's not what I'm saying. But Rivera's comments make it seem as if we're going to be the Chargers. That's where he's coming from and that's an aggressive, attacking style offense.

We don't have that personnel. Doesn't mean our style can't beat that type of team, considering we beat the Chargers without Smith.

[mav1234]

I think you just have evaluated our talent differently than our coach has. You don't need massive free agents (?? lol) to attack on offense. You also don't need to throw the ball 400 yards or make 80 yard receptions twice a game to have an attacking offense.

edit: as a note, we have some very good offensive weapons for an attacking offense.

Goodson & Dwill are great backs for catching passes out of the backfield.

Smitty and Gettis have both shown the ability to stretch the entire field this season. While Gettis took a pass all the way, Smitty was constantly open deep and had some nice deep catches, tho only one with Clausen (which of course was taken away, bastard refs). Lafell's also got speed and you never know how he will improve this year; he was a big target last year and Chud will find ways to utilize him and the others.

While our TEs have clearly not been utilized in pass catching, we have seen glimpses from Rosario of being a great catcher and a decent blocker, and Barnidge has the physical ability to go far. King is a great backup to an all around tight end.

Our QBs are our weakness but whatever. They've been talked about.

Our OLine needs depth and health, but it's a decent unit and with the correct schemes we could have decent pass blocking, especially if our RBs can learn to pass block too (Dwill could, seemed like Goodson/Stew missed a ton of blitzers).

[PantherFanForLife]

I think you just have evaluated our talent differently than our coach has.

No I think I'm probably a lot closer to his real evaluations and what he thinks rather than what he says in a press conference. I fully believe Rivera is a man of common sense who doesn't drink his own kool aid.

He's saying exactly what the fan base wants to hear.

[csx]

No I think I'm probably a lot closer to his real evaluations and what he thinks rather than what he says in a press conference. I fully believe Rivera is a man of common sense who doesn't drink his own kool aid.

The head coach get's too much blame and too much credit. There's too much belief that Fox/Davidson made these players suck and too much confidence that the fix can be quickly applied by Rivera/Chudzinski. Realistically the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[PantherFanForLife]

The head coach get's too much blame and too much credit. There's too much belief that Fox/Davidson made these players suck and too much confidence that the fix can be quickly applied by Rivera/Chudzinski. Realistically the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Don't speak sense here!

[Sandy Claws]

Not true. I didn't say every game.....I said the majority of his starts. They were statiscally a top attack and they simply were a good attack in the majority of his starts (the biggest thing that limited their production was the fact Clausen couldn't aid them in picking up first downs.....not opposing defenses).

And I still disagree, he had an extremely erratic, inconsistent, running game. "Stats don't tell the whole story. No where near "top tier" running game especially when you consider that 11 of the team's league leading 16 fumbles were by running backs.

[CRA]

Perhaps you missed the point. Again the comment I made was about a ball control offense. In 2008, we were a ball control offense. We were not, have never been, and will not be an attacking style, aggressive offense in 2011. Probably never will be as long as this FO continues to refuse to go after big name offensive players.

The best we have ever been was an overachieving ball control offense. I never claimed we could not have a good offense. Ball control offense doesn't mean bad offense. It means conservative offense.

I think some of you are thinking I'm implying we will have a bad offense, and that's not what I'm saying. But Rivera's comments make it seem as if we're going to be the Chargers. That's where he's coming from and that's an aggressive, attacking style offense.

We don't have that personnel. Doesn't mean our style can't beat that type of team, considering we beat the Chargers without Smith.

perhaps were simply see the same thing differently.....

in 2008 we were an attacking team......and at that point Jake was average at best (realy being generous). Yes we ran the ball alot......but we attacked downfield. That is why we had 11 TDs from pass 10 yards or further downfield. That is why the bulk of our passing yards game from throws 10 yards and further downfield. When Carolina has been good they have attacked......that doesn't mean they are going to a Colts style of attacking pass offense. But they did attack downfield......the dink and dunk doesn't work when you want your RBs to run over people.

[mav1234]

The head coach get's too much blame and too much credit. There's too much belief that Fox/Davidson made these players suck and too much confidence that the fix can be quickly applied by Rivera/Chudzinski. Realistically the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

"These players suck"? We had one of the top running games for a few weeks.

We had two rookies that were among tops in the league for rookie receivers.

Our TEs are a question mark, but I think most of us think that.

Our QBs sucked, yes, and that is something they KNOW they need to address.

[mav1234]

No I think I'm probably a lot closer to his real evaluations and what he thinks rather than what he says in a press conference. I fully believe Rivera is a man of common sense who doesn't drink his own kool aid.

He's saying exactly what the fan base wants to hear.

I disagree. He knows that if you want to win you need to have an offense that can attack on either the ground or in the air. Sure, there will be times when you want to control the clock and run the ball, but you also will need to stretch the field and gain large chunks of yards. I think we have the personnel to accomplish both... well, outside of the QB spot anyway.

[Sandy Claws]

last 6 starts.

And 2 of those were the Atlanta games where we were padding running stats despite being down 3 scores at half time. We were getting stuffed in the first half.

[Snake]

Jaws has been more wrong then a weatherman. He prob still supports giving Alex Smith some more time.

[CRA]

And I still disagree, he had an extremely erratic, inconsistent, running game. "Stats don't tell the whole story. No where near "top tier" running game especially when you consider that 11 of the team's league leading 16 fumbles were by running backs.

well we agree to disagree......from Baltimore forward, the run game was simply good. They produced better than just about every team in the NFL during that time frame.......and had a lot more working against them than other teams.

late in the year, Jimmy simply didn't have as much working against him as people paint.