Cam vs Tim

[Showtime]

Showtime with the exception of the titans game we have had a chance to win every game this year and a good chance at that with the toughest schedule in the league. The cards just didn't fall in our favor and we learned how to lose all the close ones. IMO we have talent and are well coached. It's actually amazing how we have played with a new system and a very young team with minimal time to prepare. To me cam looks like a seasoned vet and I would rather have him than anyone. you are the dumbest fan I have ever seen on the huddle which happens to have the dumbest bloggers in the history of the web. You sir take the top prize.

I know we did. Like I said, I don't buy into the whole we need this amount of personnel. We needed a full 60 minute of good QB play and execution to win. We needed to finish better than 1 out of our 9 very winnable games which all ended very similarly. Failing on the final drives that would have otherwise ended or kept the game going.

But we also half-assed poo too this season. We have not been fully committed to winning this year from the beginning of the year. That much was obvious. Then by game 3 we kind of wanted to do it, but were not sure and then Cam started talking about winning, but Rivera himself was following, not leading that charge. Management wasn't backing up their talk with much needed personnel changes early on.

Two other big questions and red flags I saw this season. One I still have no answer for 18 weeks in. It has never been clarified.

1. Why were my coaches dicking around mid-season talking about a defensive scheme change? That just seemed like panic move central and comments that came out of nowhere.

2. Is this Air Coryell offense a decision that Chud and Rivera made because this is the scheme they want to run permanently, or is this something they only experimented with because it was easiest for Cam Newton coming out of college.

If they are serious about this style offense, which no one else has really cared to copy much, why are we not trying to get a legitimate back-up that would actually be able to jump in and take over in case Cam Newton goes down?

You saw Philly. They were serious about it and committed. They wanted to try it with Vick, but they also picked up Young as a back-up. That makes sense. We could have done the same thing. Young was available. Anderson isn't a rusher.

I don't think we know what we are doing yet. I don't think we have a plan. And I don't see the vision or the direction which is the scariest part after a full season. Are we committed to an offensive style? Are we committed to Cam Newton and willing to try the best offense for him? Why have these questions not been seriously addressed and cleared up at this point? It seems like we are experimenting and still trying to figure poo out. No plan, but rather winging it.

We are winging it. I would not be surprised if Cam Newton runs a completely different offense in 2011. Which is going to make me wanna puke, if we did this just so he could transition easily, but isn't even where we really wanna end up. Then it really would mean this season was a complete freaking waste from every possible angle.

These type of moves is what would make me think we're building. These type of moves would make me think, we're trying to get the pieces to fall into place. Right now, I don't know what this franchise's vision is.

[ed bell]

Absolutely committed to an offensive scheme with a complicated playbook, yet there is doubt and the feeling that it's being made up as we go? Experimenting? Seriously? GTFO.

[(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻]

To me, this is the same as asking somebody if they would rather have Jonathan Stewart or Peyton Hillis.

I prefer the Panther in both cases :)

The Golden Calf of Bristol to me seems like an old school QB that will win the game through grit and a never say die attitude. Cam on the other hand is the future.

I like progress.

[Showtime]

Pretty much....what did I read today? The Panthers have never averaged more yards per attempt on offense and allowed more yards per attempt on defense.....add the rookie mistakes, short off-season and rookie staff....

And this is why your sound logic isn't sound. Not only is the averaging yards on offense not really a fuging accomplishment of any sort but it's not a measuring stick of any sort either because what you are not realizing is we are running a style of offense built to get a lot of yards. It's not an amazing thing. This is actually VERY expected of Air Coryel. It's SUPPOSED to do this. It's SUPPOSED to get more yards than John Fox offense. It's SUPPOSED to get your higher scoring games. This second part is actually what's not clicking. But that part alone isn't enough to actually = good offense.

And it also has a LOT to do with part B of your logic, if you actually followed it. One leads to the other. Us being inefficient on offense, leads to a bad defense. I'm sorry you still haven't figured this one out. It's sad frankly that you still try to argue this despite the amount of verifiable evidence, numbers and proof I have showed you.

They go hand in hand, ok? It may not make a whole lot of sense to to you and appear counter intuitive, but when an offense gets a lot of yards and doesn't score...it makes you a pooty losing offense AND hurts your defense. It's only good for football talk and bragging right but it actually means you are WORSE than one that doesn't get a lot of yards but operates efficiently. This offense is not currently better than a conservative and efficient John Fox offense. It simply is not and has not been all year.

That's just a fact. You just wanna stick to old, flawed, mentality despite evidence of the contrary. Not my problem. You talk and sound like an amateur fan when it comes to this part. So your argument is just an empty statement. Meaningless. It doesn't actually prove or show or say anything.

I'll answer some of your other points here:

-Bengals are doing what I am against, but they have an efficient offense and are primarily teaching Dalton how to manage a football game. Dalton's ahead of Cam when it comes to being NFL ready. He's proven to be much more ready for the job. They are the 9th most efficient offense in the NFL even after their most recent loss. That's incredible! And that is not something I am against.

-Yates. This is a great example of why benching works. It's about the coaching and team as a whole. It's about learning on the bench until you are ready and it really doesn't affect development. This is the type of team I prefer. Not one centered around one star player. They are smart. Believe it or not, GB and the Patriots are actually built exactly this way. The system makes the entire team.

-The 14 games Cam's played this season didn't actually accelerate anything. He made the same exact mistake in week 14 that he did in week 1. It's gave him game time experience. Game time experience is no substitute for a solid foundation. Without that you will fail. He has not progressed in that aspect. You believe in a myth!

-Yes starting Peyton was a bad decision. It cost them a season. It actually helped create this myth. There's never a need to throw away a season to develop a rookie. There are much better QB's who have achieved more and faster than Peyton has in his career in what matters: Rodgers, Ben, Brees and the big daddy of them all: Tom Brady. A 7th rounder, who took over after riding the bench and has done as much in his career to rival the greatest achievers like Montana, not just Peyton manning.

Those ARE facts. Screwing your fan base out of a season because it "helps develop a rookie QB" is a myth. "Defense wins championships". Myth.

[teeray]

I think the offense has been exactly what they wanted and will continue to be what it is with the hope that experience will allow Cam to cut down on his turnovers.

You know that I think our offense has been pretty good this year. If Cam cuts his turnovers in half it will become elite.

But either way we also have to get a lot better on defense and special teams. I think with a full offseason and a year of experience for everyone you will see improvements in all 3 facets. And probably some new faces on defense.

[Dilated_chakra]

Anderson was a pro bowler under chud with this style of offense with similar a similar set up. If you would have done you homework you would know it is in fact the offense chud runs. Don't downplay newton like they had to do something to fit him. In addition Anderson looked like the best qb in preseason. He would do well with chuds offense. The defense runs zone sometimes and man others. Hybrid of 4-3 & 3-4 so a scheme change wouldn't be dramatic they are doing a lot of complex things and it takes time to learn. Lots of big plays have been giving up during this process

[AceMan]

Uhm Matt Moore, Mcnabb, Young, you name it. Even Jake Delhomme would have given us a better chance at a winning season this year. Any of those guys would have been a smarter decision day 1 than a rookie QB who self-admitted had no idea how to read NFL defenses in a lockout year.

This is all that translates to: " Since we ended up losing, it couldn't have possible been any better no matter what we would have done."

Harbaugh - 49ers. Winning

Cincinnati-Bengals. Decent.

Fox -Broncos - Winning.

I mean look around. Even Yates, a third string QB. Rode the bench all season long. Came in and won 2 back to back. Playing rookie QB's is not quite 100% guarantee you will end up having a losing season, but it's up there. It's pretty damn close.

Teams who went with rookies: Vikings, Jaguars, us...losers. Only Cinci pulled it off...barely and they are not done yet. Things are not looking so hot for them anymore either.

You really don't think we would have been better off in a lock-out year with a veteran QB? You don't think it would have been in everyone's best interest if we would have re-signed a vet, let Cam learn in practice or compete for the job? You don't think Cam Newton would have been better off concentrating in practice, learning the basics, before actually stepping foot on the field? Do you truly buy into this retarded mentality all this somehow helped Cam Newton develop into an elite QB in the long run? That this is how you develop elite QB's?

Give me a break. It has nothing to do with it. It's just an excuse. It's not backed up by anything. You think if the Colts didn't play Peyton and he didn't throw 28 picks his first year, he would have never ended up a good QB?

This is exactly what I am talking about. Sound logic. Common sense. It's just right out the window this year. It's gone for most people.

[teeray]

And this is why your sound logic isn't sound. Not only is the averaging yards on offense not really a fuging accomplishment of any sort but it's not a measuring stick of any sort either because what you are not realizing is we are running a style of offense built to get a lot of yards. It's not an amazing thing. This is actually VERY expected of Air Coryel. It's SUPPOSED to do this. It's SUPPOSED to get more yards than John Fox offense. It's SUPPOSED to get your higher scoring games. This second part is actually what's not clicking. But that part alone isn't enough to actually = good offense.

And it also has a LOT to do with part B of your logic, if you actually followed it. One leads to the other. Us being inefficient on offense, leads to a bad defense. I'm sorry you still haven't figured this one out. It's sad frankly that you still try to argue this despite the amount of verifiable evidence, numbers and proof I have showed you.

They go hand in hand, ok? It may not make a whole lot of sense to to you and appear counter intuitive, but when an offense gets a lot of yards and doesn't score...it makes you a pooty losing offense AND hurts your defense. It's only good for football talk and bragging right but it actually means you are WORSE than one that doesn't get a lot of yards but operates efficiently. This offense is not currently better than a conservative and efficient John Fox offense. It simply is not and has not been all year.

That's just a fact. You just wanna stick to old, flawed, mentality despite evidence of the contrary. Not my problem. You talk and sound like an amateur fan when it comes to this part. So your argument is just an empty statement. Meaningless. It doesn't actually prove or show or say anything.

I'll answer some of your other points here:

-Bengals are doing what I am against, but they have an efficient offense and are primarily teaching Dalton how to manage a football game. Dalton's ahead of Cam when it comes to being NFL ready. He's proven to be much more ready for the job. They are the 9th most efficient offense in the NFL even after their most recent loss. That's incredible! And that is not something I am against.

-Yates. This is a great example of why benching works. It's about the coaching and team as a whole. It's about learning on the bench until you are ready and it really doesn't affect development. This is the type of team I prefer. Not one centered around one star player. They are smart. Believe it or not, GB and the Patriots are actually built exactly this way. The system makes the entire team.

-The 14 games Cam's played this season didn't actually accelerate anything. He made the same exact mistake in week 14 that he did in week 1. It's gave him game time experience. Game time experience is no substitute for a solid foundation. Without that you will fail. He has not progressed in that aspect. You believe in a myth!

-Yes starting Peyton was a bad decision. It cost them a season. It actually helped create this myth. There's never a need to throw away a season to develop a rookie. There are much better QB's who have achieved more and faster than Peyton has in his career in what matters: Rodgers, Ben, Brees and the big daddy of them all: Tom Brady. A 7th rounder, who took over after riding the bench and has done as much in his career to rival the greatest achievers like Montana, not just Peyton manning.

Those ARE facts. Screwing your fan base out of a season because it "helps develop a rookie QB" is a myth. "Defense wins championships". Myth.

I don't want to start another bitch fest with you but our offense is not the problem with our defense. It just isn't. Even the stats that have absolutely nothing to do with our offense is near the bottom of the league.

It is okay if you are not satisfied with our offense. We have to agree to disagree on that. But quit trying to put our dismal defensive performance on our offense. There is nothing, and I mean nothing to support that claim

[chef17]

EFFICIENCY!

Points scored means poo if you are not efficient. It's what I keep trying to pound in some heads. The answer isn't defense. It's efficiency!

That's the difference.

That's why New England can win with a "bad" defense that's worse than ours. That's why Green Bay can.

Their offenses are efficient so their defenses allow less points. Ours isn't. But their defense is no better in yards, no better in the red-zone. Their defenses are no better than ours in any freaking category except points allowed. There is no other explanation for this. They "suck" just as bad or worse than our defense. Yet their defense allows less points, offense scores more, and their team wins? Why? Efficiency. QB's. A better offense.

PS: And that has everything to do with the fact that what you think of as a "defensive category" isn't a defensive stat in the first place. It's not in essence. Total yards allowed. It's a poor measurement of your defense. Just as meaningless as total yards gained. Points allowed. Completely effected by the offense(think FG's and turnovers...nothing a defense can do in general to stop a FG or a turnover from becoming at least 3 points that took place within scoring range. Blocking one is like a miracle in the NFL. Maybe "Superman" can. He should show our defensive players how to play "up" to his level).

Packers and Pats defenses are much better than ours because they get turnovers. That's why they allow less points. If our defense got more turnovers they would allow less points as well. Can't blame our offense because our defense can't get the ball.

[Porn Shop Clerk]

cam needs to step it up and force more fumbles and pick off moar interceptions

[AceMan]

I'm glad you changed this up a bit.

PFFL has already explained his logic ad nauseam...

-PFFL already has a grudge against the Panthers management/staff/coaches for tanking last season and going into this season with the logic of "gaining experience/rebuilding." He does not care when you try to explain Cam is a rookie, or that we have a new staff. He sees teams like the Broncos/49ers and gets jealous.

Uhm Matt Moore, Mcnabb, Young, you name it. Even Jake Delhomme would have given us a better chance at a winning season this year. Any of those guys would have been a smarter decision day 1 than a rookie QB who self-admitted had no idea how to read NFL defenses in a lockout year.

This is all that translates to: " Since we ended up losing, it couldn't have possible been any better no matter what we would have done."

Harbaugh - 49ers. Winning

Cincinnati-Bengals. Decent.

Fox -Broncos - Winning.

I mean look around. Even Yates, a third string QB. Rode the bench all season long. Came in and won 2 back to back. Playing rookie QB's is not quite 100% guarantee you will end up having a losing season, but it's up there. It's pretty damn close.

Teams who went with rookies: Vikings, Jaguars, us...losers. Only Cinci pulled it off...barely and they are not done yet. Things are not looking so hot for them anymore either.

You really don't think we would have been better off in a lock-out year with a veteran QB? You don't think it would have been in everyone's best interest if we would have re-signed a vet, let Cam learn in practice or compete for the job? You don't think Cam Newton would have been better off concentrating in practice, learning the basics, before actually stepping foot on the field? Do you truly buy into this retarded mentality all this somehow helped Cam Newton develop into an elite QB in the long run? That this is how you develop elite QB's?

Give me a break. It has nothing to do with it. It's just an excuse. It's not backed up by anything. You think if the Colts didn't play Peyton and he didn't throw 28 picks his first year, he would have never ended up a good QB?

This is exactly what I am talking about. Sound logic. Common sense. It's just right out the window this year. It's gone for most people.

No kidding. Who the heck even thought we would sign Anderson? Where did that even come from? If not re-signing Moore who would have been cheap as dirt wasn't obvious we had no intention from the get go to make a run for it this year, if signing Anderson didn't signal that, it sure as hell signaled it after we lost Beason, Thomas Davis, and needed receivers so damn bad earlier in the season and we did NOTHING about it.

Nothing. We were dead set on playing Cam since before draft I think and no matter what we were going to be ok with a losing season. But some wanna sit there and talk about a losing mentality when basically that's exactly what this season has been. We had no intention of offering him any real competition in training camp. We knew that getting a rookie ready for this season in a lock-out year would not be realistic. We knew teams with vet QB's would be at a huge advantage.

We laid down.

:troll: :troll: :troll:

[CatMan72]

LOL, so we're running the offense we're running now to make it easy on Cam?

[CatMan72]

cam needs to step it up and force more fumbles and pick off moar interceptions

...and kick FG's.

[Porn Shop Clerk]

also some singing and dancing would be nice