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!

     

Owning what you write

teeray

By teeray,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

Naanee was a five year veteran who just happened to play on the same team that Rivera was a coach for the last 3 years, and also a team who several other players defected from. Yeah, absolutely no connection there.

Oh, and is Josh McCown an established veteran starter?

Naanee was nowhere near as established as Jake was and Moore had beaten McCown out until he broke his leg.

Comparing the two just doesn't work. LaFell might do okay here, but it's a square peg in a round hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Why is years more important than attempts? Starts? Etc?

Cam has 70% the attempts Moore does so his development should be pretty close to Moores

Pretty simplistic logic there. Years are more important because players who sit but get the full offseason and preseason to play and the regular season to sit and watch the starter gives them a much better perspective than a guy who is thrust into a starter role like Cam with virtually no offseason or a truncated training camp and has little time to prepare and watch.

You keep saying you know football. Is this kind of post just baiting someone else or do you really beleive what you just said. The first is understandable but if it is the second................... Wow...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bleys Newbie

bleys

Posted
Posted

Legedu is okay as a third/fourth wr on this team.

Smith is the superstar.

LaFell is polished, 15 yard route guy.

Gettis will be the burner, stretch the field guy.

Legs will be the matchup problem guy.

sprinkle in a two headed RB monster who can run screens with the best of them and endzone threats with Shockey and Thor.....

holy poo

I feel really good about that situation as well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

Pretty simplistic logic there. Years are more important because players who sit but get the full offseason and preseason to play and the regular season to sit and watch the starter gives them a much better perspective than a guy who is thrust into a starter role like Cam with virtually no offseason or a truncated training camp and has little time to prepare and watch.

You keep saying you know football. Is this kind of post just baiting someone else or do you really beleive what you just said. The first is understandable but if it is the second................... Wow...

Well in Moore's case he had no camp with Carolina his first year and likely got very minimal reps in camp with Dallas as a 3rd stringer. His second year he had a full camp but broke his leg the last week so he was out the next 6, likely stunting his development. His third year in the league he was also 3rd on the depth chart due to the broken leg and again didn't get many reps. He had a full offseason in his 4th year but it was plagued by JR. This was his most complete and in depth offseason as he was the presumed starter until Clausen was to take the position over. During that season he was away from the team after being on IR and having an uncertain contract status. He also had no camp his 5th year and even had to sit out longer than most players in the NFL because he switched teams in the offseason.

I'm a firm believer that playing time and a good coach are more important than simply time in the league. Being 3rd on the depth chart on a team with no competition for the spot because you have an established guy in the coaches eyes is not equivalent to everyone in the organization being dedicated to you succeeding and to think it is comparable is ignorant at best.

I truly believe starts is the best way to judge a player over time. You'd hope they would be continuous starts but it doesn't always work that way. Guys that are out there playing, getting live experience over the course of a season have the edge I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

While I agree that starts are the best way to judge a player over time, I don't know how you could reasonably argue that Cam Newton has had 70% of the total experience as an NFL quarterback that Matt Moore has. I realize Moore missed a ton of time due to injuries etc but he has had enough other time, offseasons, etc, that he should be far ahead of Cam in many respects (and tbh he likely is, but let's avoid that discussion lol)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

Well in Moore's case he had no camp with Carolina his first year and likely got very minimal reps in camp with Dallas as a 3rd stringer. His second year he had a full camp but broke his leg the last week so he was out the next 6, likely stunting his development. His third year in the league he was also 3rd on the depth chart due to the broken leg and again didn't get many reps. He had a full offseason in his 4th year but it was plagued by JR. This was his most complete and in depth offseason as he was the presumed starter until Clausen was to take the position over. During that season he was away from the team after being on IR and having an uncertain contract status. He also had no camp his 5th year and even had to sit out longer than most players in the NFL because he switched teams in the offseason.

I'm a firm believer that playing time and a good coach are more important than simply time in the league. Being 3rd on the depth chart on a team with no competition for the spot because you have an established guy in the coaches eyes is not equivalent to everyone in the organization being dedicated to you succeeding and to think it is comparable is ignorant at best.

I truly believe starts is the best way to judge a player over time. You'd hope they would be continuous starts but it doesn't always work that way. Guys that are out there playing, getting live experience over the course of a season have the edge I believe.

First of all he did have a full camp and preseason but it was with Dallas. While that didn't help him with the playbook it did help him reading defenses and getting reps. He was able to sit and learn the playbook for most of the year until he was called into duty. In 2007 he only started 3 games but was activated for 9 games. With the shuffling around he got reps through out the year although not many with the 1s until close to when he started. Year 2 was a bust but he did get experience in camp and had a full offseason. He also got to sit in the meetings, work on the offense and do what many quarterbacks say is important which is take mental reps. Year three he played in 7 games and started 5. He wasn't third on the chart for most of the season,. He was the acknowledged number 2 for most of that time and got plenty of reps. Obviously in year 4 he was the starter until he lost the job and got most of the reps early. Moore had every chance from late in 2009 on to develop and perform. I don't buy that Fox didn't want him to succeed but obviously had some concerns based on his lack of preparation, laissez faire attitude and unwillingness to be the first in and last out every day. Truth is Moore sabotaged his own success. I suspect the lessons learned in Carolina were part of the reason he did better in Miami. I really didn't follow him but suspect he was a harder worker this year versus the past.

I believe if Moore had come in and displayed the work ethic and leadership of Newton right out of the chute, it wouldn't have taken so long to start. I suspect when Jake first struggled in 2009 he would have gone to Moore. But as he said, there was little in his demeanor, practice behavior and locker room presence to suggest he would come and be successful. Moore was his own worse enemy at times.

So to the point, was his five years worth more than a rookie season? Anyone who has watched football even casually would know the answer to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheRealDeal Newbie

TheRealDeal

Posted
Posted

First of all he did have a full camp and preseason but it was with Dallas. While that didn't help him with the playbook it did help him reading defenses and getting reps. He was able to sit and learn the playbook for most of the year until he was called into duty. In 2007 he only started 3 games but was activated for 9 games. With the shuffling around he got reps through out the year although not many with the 1s until close to when he started. Year 2 was a bust but he did get experience in camp and had a full offseason. He also got to sit in the meetings, work on the offense and do what many quarterbacks say is important which is take mental reps. Year three he played in 7 games and started 5. He wasn't third on the chart for most of the season,. He was the acknowledged number 2 for most of that time and got plenty of reps. Obviously in year 4 he was the starter until he lost the job and got most of the reps early. Moore had every chance from late in 2009 on to develop and perform. I don't buy that Fox didn't want him to succeed but obviously had some concerns based on his lack of preparation, laissez faire attitude and unwillingness to be the first in and last out every day. Truth is Moore sabotaged his own success. I suspect the lessons learned in Carolina were part of the reason he did better in Miami. I really didn't follow him but suspect he was a harder worker this year versus the past.

I believe if Moore had come in and displayed the work ethic and leadership of Newton right out of the chute, it wouldn't have taken so long to start. I suspect when Jake first struggled in 2009 he would have gone to Moore. But as he said, there was little in his demeanor, practice behavior and locker room presence to suggest he would come and be successful. Moore was his own worse enemy at times.

So to the point, was his five years worth more than a rookie season? Anyone who has watched football even casually would know the answer to that.

Once you start agreeing with Fox on personell decisions, especially QB decisions, you know you're on the losing end of an argument.

I agree 5 isn't a starting rookie, but it's closer than you think. Nothing substitutes for game experience and Cam got a lot of it.

As to Moore's work ethic and leadership, lol. Everywhere he's ever gone he's been a leader and a hard worker, then all of the sudden he gets to the NFL and he's not, then he leaves Carolina and he is again?

You think maybe, just maybe, Foxy was trying to cover his ass for not playing Moore earlier, considering how productive he was in 2009? It took a broken finger from Jake to play him and Moore spited Fox and dominated the league for those 5 games, putting his name up there with Manning and Rivers. Naw, that can't be it, Moore was just lazy in Carolina when he'd never shown that anywhere, not @ UCLA, Oregon State, Dallas or Miami.

Carolina made him lazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...