Panthers Fox Needs to Go with the Hot Hand at Free Safety
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 9:40 AM EST
122 comments
So John Fox is still mum on who will start at FS against the Saints this week if previous starter Charles Godfrey is recovered from his ankle injury.
"The guy played well," Fox said. "We're leaning on some young guys in a lot of different areas. (Cornerback) Captain Munnerlyn played 50 plays in the game, and he's a rookie. For Sherrod Martin to go in there against a very potent passing attack and manage the game as a safety, which you're very involved with as far as calls — situation calls, down-and-distance calls — I thought he ran around and played pretty well."
That's a freaking understatement. In his rookie season FS Charles Godfrey had 5 passes defensed and 1 INT in 16 starts. Maybe that is not bad for a rookie but at the same time it gave no indication that he had 'ball-hawk' type of instincts either. Through 6 games this season he has onE 1 pass defensed and no INT's. That just ain't getting it done.
more after the jump...
I still think Godfrey is a good athlete who can contribute to this team, the only question is where?
"You have to train guys at different spots; we just don't throw them out there," Fox said. "He's kind of a tweener guy. He was in college, both as a corner and as a safety. It's a good skill set to have, a little bit like Charles Godfrey when we took him a couple of years ago. He had training at both. The problem was he got set back due to injury."
Okay, so we have two guys with similar measurables and experience coming out of college. Yet one seems more suited for tackling and playing man coverage (Godfrey) and the other seems to take better angles on the ball and has great hands (Martin). Seems a little obvious that Martin is better suited for FS and Godfrey for SS or even CB.
Okay, it's only one game Jaxon I can hear you saying now. But what a game! And what a spark for the secondary!
So is this a tough decision Panther fans?
"Right now, he'll be day-to-day, and we'll make those decisions as we go," Fox replied when asked if Godfrey would keep his job. Asked what in the world that non-answer meant, Fox said: "It means I'm not going to answer that."
In true Fox style he is declining to answer a question at this point but I think just the fact he is declining says he is leaning towards keeping Martin as the starter.
So what say ye Panther fans?
0 recs |
122 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Who should start?
Martin.
Who will start if 100%?
Godfrey. Unless Meeks really sticks his neck out.
by Tater596 on Nov 3, 2009 9:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
What would Meeks have to do with it?
Fox has shown a propensity to go with the hot hand throughout his career.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Definitely Martin
He’s a rookie coming off a great 1st game, getting the starting nod will do wonders for his confidence.
by JC_GSO on Nov 3, 2009 10:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Definitely should be Martin
he is a ball hawk — a perfect fit at FS (at least a 10000000% better fit than Godfrey is)
I know he’s a rookie, but he showed me enough against the Cardinals to give him a chance.
by bwsmith25 on Nov 3, 2009 10:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting...
that I completely forgot we HAD a FS until Martin started showcasing his skills. Seriously, the guy was all over the place – and I definitely voted to have him start in Godfrey’s place. I’m not “down” on Godfrey – it just seemed to me that against a verrrry potent Arizona aerial assault, he stood his ground and shined.
by boywonderncsu on Nov 3, 2009 10:13 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
+1 ...how often did we hear Godfrey's name called?
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 10:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As often as he blew coverages and left Ken Lucas out to dry last year?
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 4:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about both?
We might need 12 on the field against the saints. lol
Okay seriously I voted Martin, ride the hot hand.
by LittleKing on Nov 3, 2009 10:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
It won't matter
at least according to the Talking Heads – the Saints are going undefeated.
Oh wait! Someone actually mentioned the Panthers and their runing game against the running D that let Turner run a bunch last night.
by panthersnbraves on Nov 3, 2009 10:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Oh - forgot to mention
Brees was staring down his receivers last night. Hope Meeks was watching that in the tape.
by panthersnbraves on Nov 3, 2009 10:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I saw that too
Drew was telegraphing. He has that much confidence in his receivers.
by univonc on Nov 3, 2009 10:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the D gets another 5 pick and a fumble.
by chinchillas sword on Nov 3, 2009 11:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Brees has losing record...
I don’t go back to the Chargers days, but I believe Mr Brees is 1 and 5 against the Panthers. Likewise, Jake is 5-1 against the Saints. Does it mean anything? Maybe not, but I’m just saying….
If the Panthers can win the turnover battle, they will have a chance.
by DrTarheel on Nov 3, 2009 3:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey...if the Saints lose to the Panthers it makes their 7 wins
look like a mirage in a sense. It could crack their confidence!
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 3:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see that happening...
…and certainly not in a way that lets us make up 4 losses to catch them. Even if we beat them both times this season (unlikely), we’d still be 2 games back with a far tougher schedule to play. Thus, we need to stay focused on winning every game we can to have a shot at the wild card. If New Orleans self-destructs down the road, great. But I woudn’t count on it.
So, next week, we need to beat the Saints. We also need to pull for:
- Washington over the Falcons (unlikely given the Falcons will want to right their ship after the Saints loss)
- San Diego over the Giants (possible given how badly the Giants have looked)
- Philadelphia over the Cowboys (possible)
- Bucs over the Packers (unlikely, but who knows?)
- Titans over San Francisco (maybe)
- Lions over the Seahawks (not happening)
- Arizona over the Bears (possible bounce-back game for the Cardinals)
Losses by any or all of those teams helps the Panthers.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 3:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just curious
How does Philly over Dallas help the Panthers? They’ve lost to both teams, which have the same record at 5-2. Not that I need a reason to pull against the Cowboys.
by dogear on Nov 3, 2009 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Because...
Philly is 2-0 in their division. The Cowboys are 0-1. By pulling for Philly you ensure they take the division that much more easily. If Dallas wins and Philly makes up the difference in their remaining schedule, both teams could wind up being there at the end, claiming two spots in the playoffs. That may happen anyway. But, if Dallas can fall lower along with the Giants, that means there’s a potential we could sneak in over both those teams along with Atlanta.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 6:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Neither Delhomme nor Fox has ever lost in New Orleans.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They didn't have Ellis.
Hopefully he’s not in for our game.
by chinchillas sword on Nov 3, 2009 11:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He is out
3-4 weeks.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
by James The Aussie on Nov 3, 2009 1:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I saw 4-6 as of yesterday.
Which is surely a good thing. And while they’re claiming Goodwin only has a bruised knee, it’s a good thing if he’s less than 100%, because their backup C is former Panther Jamar Nesbit, who’s really a guard.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I voted for Martin...
Simply b/c of his ball hawking skills…especially against the Saints who love to throw the ball…
by jay23 on Nov 3, 2009 10:33 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Actions speak louder than words
This situation is no different than the controversy of Matt Moore and his 3 starts. Matt has 2 wins.
The season may be one to retool and experience the new kids for next year.
nice way to begin, in my opinion.
by univonc on Nov 3, 2009 10:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The difference as I see it though:
Is that Charles Godfrey has never shown he can play as good as Sherrod Martin did vs. Arizona.
Meanwhile, Jake has had numerous games where he played far better than Moore’s two wins.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
by James The Aussie on Nov 3, 2009 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Martin probably would not have got the opportunity to play much this year unless Godfrey got injured. Hmmm….how bad is Jake’s injury???
by Davejinxer on Nov 3, 2009 11:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not bad at all.
“The same as any Monday,’ he said.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Two wins against teams with nothing to play for.
Whoop de friggin’ do.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We all know how Fox ....
is loyal to a fault to the veteran (or experienced) players. I wonder if the question was posed to Fox before the injury if Martin or Godfrey would start at FS would his answer be “Godfrey gives us the best chance to win.”
by Davejinxer on Nov 3, 2009 11:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Given that Martin hadn't even practiced at safety before last week, yeah, probably.
Moore’s had plenty of chances to impress at the only position he plays.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I would not say plenty...
especially not with the starters and in a real game. Not talking about preseason bs.
by Davejinxer on Nov 3, 2009 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He practices every single day.
You don’t see those. The coaches do. He’s obviously not good enough to be seeing action.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 8:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In Martin we trust!
But maybe Godfrey would play well at CB his original position?
by chinchillas sword on Nov 3, 2009 11:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think he could be a good bump and run CB
He and Munnerlyn would provide some real toughness at the CB position
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's no more his "original position" than Martin's is CB.
They both played in each spot in college.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
MARTIN!!!!
put godfrey back at CB. when harris gets tired or have 3rd and long put godfrey in at SS. the versatility is just insane! the line the secondary now. it blows my mind how m guyanys we can swap and flip it must be fun for meeks. but back to martin…he didnt come out and have a big game against the bucs or the rams or the lions. not some sorry QB with 1 target to throw to. he went out there and showed his ass all over one of the best passing attacks the NFL has to offer. it would be dumb to not give him the start next week.
On how Harris feels: Not well enough to practice today. - John Fox
by Steve785 on Nov 3, 2009 12:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I agree with all of you guys. The NFL is a “right now” type of sport, whoever is hot should get the start. In this case, that’s Martin. If he plays terrible against the saints, fine, he can be benched just as quickly as he was started. I don’t think we will see that happening though, Brees didn’t look too.. umm… Breezy last night.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 12:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Well let's see and hello from Raleigh
Brees- 25 of 33 for 308 yds and 2 TD’S. O.K. and 1 int. I hope you guys don’t mind some good natured back and forth this week. And I know ya’ll didn’t mind us knocking off the dirty birds
A SAINT in Panther country
by carolinasaintsfan on Nov 3, 2009 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We're all for good natured back an forth.
And since we’re playing the prognositcation game:
- DeAngelo Williams: 137 yards, 1 TD
- Jonathan Stewart: 110 yards, 2 TD
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
by James The Aussie on Nov 3, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to go off the deep end...
and say..
DeAngelo Williams: 160 yards, 2 TD
Jonathan Stewart: 150 yards, 2 TD
Yeah, I’m going for 300+.
I’ll give Delhomme an interception, though.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
With the Saints tiny defense...
It’s entirely possible.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I did.
I’m rooting for whoever is on top of our division to lose.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Question...
Should I have been pulling for Saints or Birds last night? I pulled for the Aints b/c I figured it would be easier to catch ATL. Was the “smart” choice?
by rawjem01 on Nov 3, 2009 1:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think the Saints winning was the best result. Although they pull away, it puts us closer to ATL.. Hopefully we can make this next game a win, although I don’t see Atlanta losing to Washington next week.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Over-confidence by the Saints may be the most important factor
I wrote last Wednesday that I thought the Cards were set up by the proverbial TRAP GAME mentality, thinking they were gonna run over us, and not being as mentally prepared as they should have been.
After winning again vs the Falcons, and keeping their unbeaten status, I expect the same this Sunday — the Saints are bound to be a little full of themselves, and ripe for the upset. They may get quoted as the week goes on, as saying they’re not taking us lightly — but in their heart of hearts, you know they are.
by bigdavis on Nov 3, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My only fear...
…is that Michael Turner’s success will wake them up enough to properly prepare for Double-Trouble. That’s why I’m advocating we improve our passing game and use it to set up the run in the early going…because I expect the Saints to not only stack the line because they believe we’re one-dimensional, but also play better in that phase of their defense, because they nearly got embarrassed by the Falcons’ run game.
But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Very true but Turner ran through them using power. If they become too consumed with that, Williams will burn them with speed. I think finding the balance to stop Williams and Stewart has been one of the most difficult things for opposing defenses.. Get ran around, or ran through.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 2:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem wasn't a lack of preparation.
The Saints just aren’t very good at defending the run, particularly with Ellis out of the lineup. Smith and Allen are good to great pass rushers, but they’re not very stout against the run. Their NT, Remi Ayodele, is small for the position at 300, and their other starter on the inside, Anthony Hargrove, is a good pass-rusher himself, but he only goes 272. If they stack the line, they’re going away from the strengths of their cover-oriented DBs. Frankly, I expect them to go the same route as they did last night, daring them to try to win on the run alone. With two great backs instead of one (and Atlanta was without Norwood and Snelling, remember), I believe we can. As bad as they made Ryan look, how do you think Jake will do if we focus on the pass?
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
It’s better for New Orleans to win the division. If you look at their remaining schedule, we’re just not going to catch them. So, our only hope to make the playoffs is to beat out everyone else vying for a wild card. That includes Atlanta, who already has a better record. So, by the Saints handing them another loss, it helps us. We need beat New Orleans this Sunday and then even things up with Atlanta the following week and we can tie things up with them.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I WAS pulling for the Falcons
that way if we beat them too we’re only 2 games back at 4-4. Even if we win this week with them at 7-1 and us at 4-4 three games is hard to overcome in 8 games given the difference in schedule.
The Panthers really need only concern themselves with winning every week at this point. They must somehow get to 10 wins to have a shot which honestly is looker better after this weeks results. Giants are fading so if ’Boys and Eagles get in then we just need the Falcons and Pack to fade too.
I just have this sinking feeling that the lose to the Bills will haunt us at the end.
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
The Bills loss is the bonafide season-derailing milestone this year. If we fail to make it in (but come close), I’ll blame it on the coaching staff not getting their act together quickly enough to a) repair the hole left by Kemo’s injury in the early going (though I suspect it wouldn’t have made much difference against those first 3 teams) and b) the terrible playcalling choices in the pass/run ratio against the worst run-defense team in the league. That was absolutely mind-boggling.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And...
Kasay’s shanks of two makeable field goals that led to us failing on fourth down at kickable distance in an eight-point game. Don’t forget Kenny Moore’s doof moment when we had a chance to drive for the tie, either.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
We absolutely should have won that game against Buffalo, and much of the blame for it has to lay at Kasay’s feet. We’ve got an outside shot at the #6 seed with 9 wins, but 10 would be the mark that would pretty much guarantee it.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Once again...
Procton you fail to put any blame on Delhomme. No surprise there, c’mon even Gantt has admitted that Jake has even handcuffed the Panthers this year.
by Davejinxer on Nov 3, 2009 6:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He had a single bad pick in that game.
But the offense moved the ball well enough against Buffalo.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 8:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was going for the Falcons.
Three games over the course of nine just isn’t that inconceivable when we play them twice.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I vote for Martin...
…for several reasons. Here’s my Top 10:
1) His performance against a really good passing attack like Arizona’s should be rewarded.
2) The Saints passing attack is just as potent as the Cardinals, so we’ll need a similar effort. How many of us would expect Godfrey to be able to provide that kind of lift? Huh…no hands. Small surprise.
3) The Saints don’t have a lot of film on Martin, so it would be more difficult to prepare for him and his athleticism.
4) Even if Godfrey is supposedly injury-free…would he really be ready to go? It’s not just about physical fitness. It’s about being able to fully practice and get back up to game speed. Godfrey hasn’t been able to do that here lately. I don’t think I’d want to see him rushed back in simply because the doctors cleared him. He’s got to be ready to perform at the highest possible level against the Saints. I don’t think he’s as ready as Sherrod Martin would be.
5) I want to see if that was a one-game fluke from Sherrod Martin. And the only way to do that is to give him back-to-back starts and see how he does.
6) What have we got to lose? The team hasn’t performed all that well, defensively-speaking, with Godfrey at FS. They were starting to come around when he got injured. But, Sherrod Martin actually elevated the play of the entire secondary with his effort last week. So why not keep starting him? He contributed significantly to the Panther’s most meaningful win this season. So roll the dice again and let’s see if he stays hot.
7) I think the other players on defense can feed off Sherrod Martin. I think they’ll take even more confidence if he gets to start again than if Fox sticks with Godfrey as the veteran.
8) From a developmental perspective, I think it’s better for Sherrod Martin to get experience in consistent starts rather than occasionally filling in for someone who’s injured. So, long-term (and short-term) starting him is in the Panther’s best interests.
9) Sherrod Martin is up for rookie of the week. He gets the Panthers some positive press instead of the pessimism and beat-down the media generally has waiting for us. When is the last time Charles Godfrey generated anything like that for the team and the fans?
10) Sherrod Martin has better closing speed and takes better angles on receivers. He has as many (or more) interceptions in less time than not only Charles Godfrey, but also all of the other players on defense. He’s tied with Thomas Davis and Richard Marshall off a single game whereas everyone else has been playing the entire season. He may just be a more natural FS than anyone else on the roster. So let’s ride him and see how far he takes us. It’s not like the season is going to implode just because we go with Sherrod over Godfrey. So why not do it?
But that’s just my dime’s worth,
—Neil
P.S. Kudos to Fox for holding out on saying anything about who he plans to play. That way, he keeps the Saints guessing as long as he possibly can. That’s what he should do as our head coach. Particularly with such an important game in the division coming up.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 1:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Those are some great reasons as to why he should start.
If Martin plays anything like he did against Arizona, I hope Brees tries to stare down receivers as he did last night.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 2:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I wholeheartedly agree with you
on all 10 points…
If Martin can have another game like he did against Zona, that would be two dynamite games against the two best passing teams in the NFC (and possibly the entire league) — he has earned a chance to show that he is the real deal — and as you pointed out, it’s not like our season depends on whether or not Martin starts at FS.
by bwsmith25 on Nov 3, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll add one more reason...
…Fox needs to play Martin against another passing team like New Orleans to truly evaluate whether he should have the permanent starting job over Godfrey. If he doesn’t start him now, it’s unlikely Martin would be able to show consistency in being trusted with the starting role for the remainder of the season.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You bet...
funny how just a couple weeks ago we were thinking Martin was the one weak pick in this draft class. He just might be the gem!
I know…getting ahead of myself, its one game…but still. Just seeing how quickly he reacted to the ball in the air, taking the proper angles and then having the hands to complete the play…dynamite!
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 2:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
We may all be getting ahead of ourselves, but we are talking about a dynamite performance against one of the best QBs and best recieving corps in the NFL. He didn’t turn in a 2 INT game vs. Cleveland, he did it against the Cardinals.
That is what impresses me the most.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
by James The Aussie on Nov 3, 2009 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Although that also meant he got a lot of chances to MAKE plays.
In addition, the plays he made weren’t exactly on well-thrown balls.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
(and the first pick was really a play Gamble made.)
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In fairness, though...
…Sherrod Martin’s INTs came after Warner was already receiving heavy pressure from the Panther’s pass rush. Peppers in particulary hurried him a good bit. He had tipped balls. Peppers even picked one off and ran it back for TD before Sherrod ever got one. So, in a lot of ways, that early pressure (and the big lead the Panthers amassed) let them really pin back their ears and go after the QB. So Warner may have started getting rattled and rushing some throws or misreading coverages a bit.
That’s why I want to see Sherrod play against New Orleans. Let’s see if he can perform to that level all over again. And,let’s hope the Panthers D-line can duplicate that same effective pass-rush. This game has to have a multi-pronged approach to be successful. The defense MUST blunt New Orleans’ potent offense. Our running game MUST exploit the Saints at least as effectively as Turner managed for the Falcons. The special teams can’t give up big plays. And, we’ve got to win the turnover battle. Do all that and then we have a chance at beating them.
But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We owned the Saints last season...
we shouldn’t be any less confident just because of our current records. I feel pretty confident we can move the ball on their defense and that we can get pressure on Brees. The only question is can we stop the run and the short passes? Can we limit our mistakes and win the turnover battle? Can we convert 3rd downs?
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree...
We are less confident because of our record. And New Orleans is more confident because of theirs…and potentially overconfident, which could play to our advantage. Don’t get me wrong, it’s great that we’re regaining some confidence after the Arizona win. That’s what can happen when all three phases of game come together for us. So there’s no doubt we have the ability to beat them. And, as you said, a lot of it depends on how well we stop the run and cover the short passes. We certainly have to limit turnovers and convert on 3rd downs. I’d add we also need to shut down the Saints when they face 3rd downs so we can usher Brees off the field and play ball-control to limit their number of possessions.
But, despite all that, I don’t think we can take any solace in having “owned” the Saints last season. They were a different ball club psychologically. They’ve improved every phase in which they showed weakness. And their strengths have remained a strength.
Meanwhile, if you look at the Panthers, we’ve flipped things around. Our strength (the offense) from last year hasn’t been a strength this season. And, our defense eventually improved over last year. But our special teams drastically declined. So, we’re still a major mess in comparison.
We can turn it around, of course, but we have to have the confidence to do so. New Orleans already has it. They’ve shot down three potential playoff-caliber teams so far (i.e., Atlanta, the Giants, and the Eagles). We lost to two of those same teams already and the other one pretty badly during the preseason. So in the confidence game, our comparative records do mean something.
But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 3:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wasn't just last season.
Neither Jake nor Fox has ever lost in New Orleans, and we haven’t done much worse at home.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There's a first time for everything
Those Saints teams in the past were completely different, they didn’t have the swagger of this years model. That defense is freakin scaring the crap out of me, they are an oppurtunistic, blitzing defense, the type any QB will struggle against. If we don’t run it 50 times total this week we are going to lose, period. There offense isn’t one-dimensional like they’ve been in the past. They have three guys who can burn us, Bell, Thomas, and Bush. And what more can you say about the passing game. The Saints were burned by mistakes Monday night, that is going to be the X-factor.
by Flowing Willow on Nov 4, 2009 7:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why would you think their runners can burn us?
They’re no different than the guys they had last year, and they hardly lit us up in that phase of the game, averaging just 83 yards on the ground per game.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 4, 2009 12:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bell is a solid guy
He’s a bruiser and can cut it back similar to DeAngelo. Thomas is a threat in both the passing and running game, he can run. Bush is absolutely deadly in space. These guys aren’t Double Trouble, or even Triple Threat, none of them will scare you on their own. But I’m telling you right now, if we don’t come in with a healthy respect for those three’s abilities, they will gash us.
by Flowing Willow on Nov 5, 2009 8:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again, they're the SAME backs they had on their roster last year...
And they did nothing against us. So why would they worry?
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 5, 2009 10:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The saints had a 100+ yard rusher against Detroit (Bell) and Buffalo (Thomas). Beyond that they haven’t had much of a break out back, just three consistent backs.
They’ve ran the ball 16 times more than we have this season but we carry a higher average/carry with just 31 less total rushing yards.
So long as we respect their running game we should be able to keep it in check.
I think it’s going to come down to Williams & Stewart, on the ground, having to keep up with Brees, in the air. It seems highly unlikely but, if any duo can do it, Double Trouble can.
The turn over game is also going to be BIG. The Saints are +7 for the season, meanwhile we’re -8. I’ll hope that -8 is from a period that we have put behind us, though.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 4, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It'll be interesting to see if he thrives at FS.
We lost Jovan Haye because we couldn’t think to take the create route of starting him at DT (where he had literally no experience.) Tampa pulled off the position switch and he blew up.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good point about the secondary having confidence
When the CB knows they have a FS they can count on they can play tighter on the underneath. Marshall’s INT was a good example.
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 2:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Godfrey was a third-rounder just a year ago.
If we’re talking about “long-term interests,” (8) what does putting him on the bench forever do?
9. Probably back to his fake FG tackle against Arizona. But that’s literally the only play he’s made.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope he does well for the rest of the season just so I can call him the Blue Polamalu. Although not entirely precise, it still sounds nice. haha
I wish our other line backer would step up, though. Beason hast been a beast, Thomas stepped up, but Diggs just hasn’t been there.. Maybe when Johnson comes back. I’d love to get WItherspoon back next season…
Our defense is really shaping up.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 2:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Which is kind of surprising...
Our defense is really shaping up.
Because, all during the preseason and the beginning of the regular season, they looked like they (along with special teams) would be our albatross this year. Now, they’re the strongest element on the team. Kudos to Meeks and the effort the defensive players have put into learning and applying his system.
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They are?
This is the first game they’ve won for this team.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe it's the first game they've won...
…but in our other recent games, they weren’t the ones who lost them. Instead, the offense sputtering or giving up turnovers that go for scores, and the special teams complete meltdown, have been the culprits. So, yes, the defense is the strongest element on the team at the moment…unless you want to champion the running game’s success vs. Washington and Tampa Bay (i.e., our other two wins)? :-)
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 9:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I'd pretty much say they were.
And the running game was basically what on this Arizona game, too.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 4, 2009 12:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, it won't be the first time we've disagreed...
To me, the offense has struggled and the running game is the only thing that’s bailed them out…if that. Even against Washington and Tampa Bay, they struggled. And if the defense hadn’t kept us in these past few games, we wouldn’t even have reached 3-4.
In addition, despite the running success against Arizona, we were losing gas quickly in the second-half. We didn’t have a single completed pass after half-time and we nursed that 3 TD lead for all it was worth. To me, the defense won that game moreso than the offense. Forcing 5 turnovers through a combination of pass-rush and excellent coverage is a much bigger deal. And I say that not as a knock against our RBs…but rather a knock against our offense as a whole. It’s great that the running game paid dividends and helped us (especially in the early going), but I’m still not sold on them coming together as an entire unit yet. Meanwhile, the defense appears to have done that.
But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil
by NSpicer on Nov 4, 2009 7:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
I should say the defense forced 6 turnovers against Arizona. There were 5 INTs and 1 forced fumble. And the fumble was arguably the play that iced the win. And the pressure helped lead to that as well as the 5 picks and enough pressure to keep Warner from getting in sync with his receivers.
by NSpicer on Nov 4, 2009 7:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If the offense can contribute to a three-TD lead...
Any defense worth its salt should be able to hold it. Particularly given that the offense did not turn the ball over and put the defense in compromising positions as they had done earlier in the year. The best field position Arizona had following an offensive punt was their own 33, and it averaged the 25. Arizona sustained three drives of 48 yards or more in the second half, and I can’t say I think that was the offense’s fault.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 4, 2009 2:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Diggs has never really been there.
He’s a consistently steady (read: mediocre) player. Conveniently for us, though, he’s paid like it too, at less than $1 million both this year and next. Next year will be another competition between himself and Dan Connor, and he’s a decent value as a smart vet regardless of whether he wins the starting job or not. Add both of their salaries up next year ($1.55 mil), and they’re still a huge savings over Witherspoon ($5 mil in ’10 and ’11), who, while solid in his own right, has proven not to be a top flight LB over many years singe he left here.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 7:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The importance of a great safety in the NFL
Safety is quickly becoming the most important position to be strong at on an NFL defense. Some would argue for MLB or DE, but certainly Safety both Strong and Free, are the most important. There is a chance in this season’s draft, we will see a Safety go #1 overall. If the team picking first does not need a QB (the Lions for example) they will almost certainly pick up game breaking SS Eric Berry out of Tennessee.
The reasons why is that the Safety positions have the most freedom on a defense to impact the momentum of a football game. They play the run and the pass, and are critical to stopping both. If you have safeties that can establish themselves as big hitters, ball hawks, or both… you really are setting yourself up for defensive success.
by Tater596 on Nov 3, 2009 3:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I suspect...
…Ed Reed of the Baltimore Ravens would agree with you. :-)
by NSpicer on Nov 3, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"Certainly?"
I wouldn’t even remotely go that far. The Colts, Broncos, Patriots, Redskins, and Bengals lead the NFL in scoring defense ths year. How many elite safties do those teams have? Remember, Sanders has been out most of the year for Indy, and Dawkins is aging and nowhere near the player he once was. Brandon Meriweather and LaRon Landry might get there some day, but they’re not yet.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, sometimes I think you enjoy arguing too much.
The Colts have Bethea, THE most underrated safety in the NFL. Not to mention Sanders. Meriweather is playing the best football of his career, not up to par with Reed or Polomalu, but if he keeps it up this year he will be among the elite. Dawkins is a leader, and while aging, he can still play. He is a big part of Denver’s defensive turnaround. The Bengals have no elite safety, and Laron Landry, while not elite, isn’t a slouch. The Redskins spot in the defensive ranking is more due to Haynesworths effect on the D, they are getting pressure, and the secondary is pretty good with Rogers and Hall, Horton and Landry.
by Flowing Willow on Nov 4, 2009 7:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't he? Hahaha
But I think I enjoy reading his arguments just as much as he enjoys arguing.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 4, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Come on, now...
Bethea is a fine safety, but he’s far from elite. He made the Pro Bowl in ‘07, which just so happened to be the only year in the last four where Sanders has played more than six regular season games. Do you think that’s a coincidence? I don’t. Denver’s big turnaround has something to do with Dawkins’ leadership, sure, but it has more to do with the fact that their front seven gets a ton of pressure on the quarterback and helps make their secondary look good. There have been several times when our stellar D-line play has made terribly average secondaries look pretty good. Hell, we were 12-4 just last year with a pair of safeties playing at a very average level (if not below at times in Godfrey’s case.) Safety is a great position to have a great player, but I’d hardly say it’s definitively the most important defensive position in football.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 4, 2009 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If you have a ball hawk at safety
like Bethea and Dawkins are, especially in todays NFL where high octane offenses are becoming the norm instead of the exception, it can make or break your defense. I’d put the most important defensive positions in order of consistent, game-breaking DE, a DT who can clog the middle and get push, and a ball-hawking safety the corners trust to have their back over the top. And it’s importance is growing, with more and more teams abandoning a solid run game, the DT may soon become secondary.
by Flowing Willow on Nov 5, 2009 8:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hollis Thomas and the Panthers' D would suggest that DT is anything but secondary.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 5, 2009 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
While I agree w/u Neil...
What if Martin gets the start and he lets it go to his head…takes unneccesary risks, takes plays off etc. Of course not a likely scenario but… what if?
by rawjem01 on Nov 3, 2009 3:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
OK...
That was a just plain stupid post…what if the sky was green? Sometimes, I just want to have something to say… Start Martin.
by rawjem01 on Nov 3, 2009 3:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
lol
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
by James The Aussie on Nov 3, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Panthers are +14 against the Saints
if I was a betting man I’d take those points.
I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com
by Jaxon on Nov 3, 2009 4:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I also think it will be essential that the Panthers play nothing short of their best in the fourth quarter. They began to let Arizona come back after going up so quickly but Peppers shut them down.
If I remember correctly (which is always a 50/50) the Saints have came back in their last two games to secure their victory. Carolina cannot get ahead and let the Saints slip up on them in the fourth, this is going to be a game played down to the very last second.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 4:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Do you think that had something to do with the QB not being in the game, though?
It certainly limited their playcalling to run the clock out.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 8:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely. I’m sure there was a much greater strain put on the defense after Delhomme went down but the offense still managed to do decent, even being close to 100% run (minus, what, two incomplete’s?), as far as possession goes.
I just hope we’re prepared for a late surge in the Saints, if we are up going into the fourth quarter.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Since when has Godfrey EVER seemed "suited for tackling???"
The guy’s blown more tackles that I can count—and that doesn’t even count the times he’s nowhere near his coverage responsibilities.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 4:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I just hope Martin does get the start
And hopefully he impresses the coaching staff enough to where it won’t be a week to week thing.
by SmithnCompany on Nov 3, 2009 6:34 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
"MARTIN/SPECIAL TEAMS"........................
OF COURSE MARTIN NEEDS TO START…HE SHOWED ME THAT HE’S A PLAYMAKER…WHO ELSE ON THAT D FLEW AROUND TO THE BALL LIKE THAT BEFORE MARTIN?? CHIRS GAMBLE USE TO PLAY LIKE THAT..I DONT KNOW WHAT HAPPENDED TO HIM. IF THAT LINE CONTINUES TO GET PRESSURE BE READY TO SEE MORE PICS COMMIN. THIS GAME WITH THE SAINTS IS GONNA TO DEPEND ON WHAT OUR SPECIAL TEAMS DO…WE CANNOT ALLOW REGGIE BUSH TO TERROIZE US ON PUNT/KICK RETURNS. PLEASE RHYS LLOYD GET TOUCHBACKS AND JASON BAKER GET SOME HANGTIME!!!!
by jeverett3131 on Nov 3, 2009 6:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't worry about Lloyd.
He’s second in the NFL in TB%.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 8:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Godfrey starts
Plain and simple, if he’s available he starts. That’s not saying he’s better, that’s not saying he deserves it, but it honors a simple principle. You don’t lose your starting job because you were injured.
Fox is a stand-up guy. He’ll start Godfrey, but you can bet that Martin will get a ton of time back there. And with both of them getting playing time against the Saints, THEN the decision on who starts will be made for the next game.
I think it will be Martin, but if he ends up with the job before Godfrey ever gets a chance to keep it then I’m going to be disappointed in Fox.
by Cyberjag on Nov 3, 2009 7:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
And I’ll be disappointed if we lose a game because we chose to sit a player that has shown signs of being great for a player that hasn’t really done much of anything in an effort to follow principles.
If Godfrey starts, he need step up and show that he wants his spot, otherwise we may just get eaten alive.
I could see giving him the start, but I’d pull him as soon as he looked to be, well, himself.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How do you think the Patriots and Tom Brady feel about that "principle?"
Godfrey’s gotten about 22 games worth of a chance to keep his job. He hasn’t impressed in those 22 games as much as Martin did in just one.
Remember when the Panthers had a good offensive line? Yeah, me too.
--Darin Gantt
by MichaelProcton on Nov 3, 2009 8:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I've always thought that was complete BS
The “never lose a starting job due to injury” argument.
He would be losing his job due to someone performing better- being injured just precipitated that.
I completely agree that Godfrey will start if healthy, though. That’s the Fox Way.
by the bomb dot com on Nov 3, 2009 8:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sherrod is a NFL rookie of the week nominee
http://www.nfl.com/partner?partnerType=rookies
I don’t think it can be said enough, for him to achieve this in his first ever NFL game is pretty encouraging.
on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city
by southtunnel on Nov 3, 2009 9:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
We could have a future star and not even know it.
I prefer that feeling to having a bust and knowing it. haha
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 3, 2009 9:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I just like seeing a Panther nominated for something again
on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city
by southtunnel on Nov 3, 2009 10:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
nice to see him up there
He won’t get it, Harvin or Byrd are shoe ins, but it is nice to see him get a shout out for a great performance.
by Tater596 on Nov 4, 2009 9:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Jason La Canfora picks the Panthers to upset the Saints
He’s the really nerdy guy that replaced the semi-nerdy Adam Schefner on NFLN. And Nerdy guys know what they are talking about. He mentions it on his blog too…
http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/11/03/week-9-preview/
on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city
by southtunnel on Nov 3, 2009 10:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Well...that does it...
…someone in the media is picking the Panthers? We’ll lose for sure now. :-)
by NSpicer on Nov 4, 2009 7:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He didn't pick any game -- he just summarizes
The only phrase that could be construed as “picking” the Panthers is “this is a trap game to me”
His game summaries are full of hedge statements like, might not, if, and we’ll see. In no game does he come out and say, “I pick …”
Panthers at Saints: This is a trap game to me. The Panthers have been bad, QB Jake Delhomme is beat up and Carolina is coming in off a win. If the Saints let their focus slip, this is a team that knows them well and could tear off some of the long outside runs that have occasionally given New Orleans trouble. But the Saints can beat you in many ways: With long drives, quick strikes or by scoring on defense. And Delhomme is more prone to handing the ball to the wrong team than pretty much anyone in the NFL."
by bigdavis on Nov 4, 2009 8:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He picked them on NFLN
And everyone ripped him for it. I couldn’t find a video of it online, so I posted his blog.
on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city
by southtunnel on Nov 4, 2009 1:46 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I posted this elsewhere, but...
Even Sterling Sharpe and Brian Baldinger of the NFL Network picked the Panthers over the Saints. I assume they’ll feature why on their “NFC Playbook” show. I would guess it has to do with how the defense is playing, how the running game has come alive over the past few games, how they minimized Jake’s turnover effect, and how the Saints got gashed pretty badly by Michael Turner due to the injury to Sedrick Ellis. Plus, they’re probably figuring the Saints won’t go undefeated this year. It’s a division game. We always play each other very tough. And the Panthers pretty much have to win right now if they want to salvage their season. As a result, the game just isn’t quite as important to New Orleans as it is to Carolina.
Or, at least, I expect that’s how they’re two-cents will go,
—Neil
by NSpicer on Nov 5, 2009 10:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Cat Scratch Reader
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
