Carolina @ New Orleans; A 1st & 2nd Half Comparison

by D-Ranged1 on Nov 9, 2009 12:09 AM EST Comment 17 comments

Most of you witnessed this game with your own eyes, meanwhile others followed stats online. There is not much to say that the majority of fans do not already know, however I offer my opinion on both the first half Panthers as well as the second half.

A thousand words each, in two seconds.

First Half:

Second Half:

And there you have it, both halves summed up, in my opinion, quite well.

Please note that I am not implying that the Saints are a group of rats whom luckily weaseled by, by any means.... Honest....

EDIT: In fact, lets name this rat Jeff.

Poll

Should we name the rat above Jeff?

The content of these posts are those of the person/idiot making the post only

0 recs | Comment 17 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I say

we refer to Jeff as “Gump” from this point forward

by bwsmith25 on Nov 9, 2009 12:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

hold on a sec..

forrest gump could actually play football…. u might be giving too much credit to davidson

by vitzeng on Nov 9, 2009 1:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not to play devils advocate

but the defense completely broke down in the second half. Both long gains by Henderson and Meachem could have been avoided had we stayed disciplined and tackled. We didn’t, they won, simple as that.

by Flowing Willow on Nov 9, 2009 2:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Very appropriate

Yes, a defense that had been very good at aoiding the big play have up two. The play calling in the red zone sucked too.

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Nov 9, 2009 8:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I thought the defense played well in the red zone

Alteast in the first half they did……….

by SmithnCompany on Nov 9, 2009 7:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

True, the defense gave up 2 big plays

But the defense held the Saints to 23 points (the fumble recovery TD isn’t on the defense).

Had Gump called a decent game plan, we would have scored a TD instead of a FG and had 24 instead of 20. And, had he not thrown deep three straight times when we had the ball in NO territory with 4 min to go, we could have scored again and made it 31 points.

Gump lost this game, IMO.

by bwsmith25 on Nov 9, 2009 8:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Or, he cost us a chance to win

would be a better way to say it

by bwsmith25 on Nov 9, 2009 8:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

See my post on the other (Epic Fail) thread

It’s execution that makes the co-ordinator look bad or good.

by bigdavis on Nov 9, 2009 10:54 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I posted this on the Epic Fail thread too...

I don’t have a problem with throwing the ball — but 2 deep throws in a row late in the 4th quarter down by 3 in NO territory? That’s insane. It was totally the wrong time to take shots downfield. If it were the 3rd quarter or early in the 4th, then I would be okay with the play call. But not with 4 minutes to go in the game down by 3 points.

by bwsmith25 on Nov 9, 2009 11:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Certainly not on 3rd down

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Nov 9, 2009 3:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I will concede the benefit of the doubt on the 2nd down play, just for the element of surprise. But the 3rd down call was insane — I wouldn’t even do it on Madden.

(Well, I probably would, but that’s beside the point.)

by bwsmith25 on Nov 9, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd do it in Madden...

And then I’d punt, because I can’t even get stupid stuff like that to work in Madden, with Delhomme.

by D-Ranged1 on Nov 9, 2009 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd do it in Madden...

And then I’d punt, because I can’t even get stupid stuff like that to work in Madden, with Delhomme.

by D-Ranged1 on Nov 9, 2009 5:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

in Madden, have 4 wr and all do curls...

man coverage is instantly beat and in zone cov, u can wait a sec to instantly get 10 yds….

yes….this works every year and even with jake delhomme or jamarcus russell… my friend uses this way too much on me…

by vitzeng on Nov 9, 2009 9:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Are you saying you'd call a run on 3rd and 8?

Just asking.

by bigdavis on Nov 9, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

In that case, I’d say yes. They had already converted third and long multiple times earlier in the day.. But I would have never passed on 2nd down either..

In fact, I would have ran on 1st. Then I would have ran on 2nd. I would then proceed to run on 3rd. Finally, I’d run on 4th. If Williams, Stewart, Sutton, or whoever decidedly got the call couldn’t produce a total of at least 10 yards on four attempts, well, I guess I just got beat and I’m going home knowing their defense stood up and stopped my running team from running, bravo.

Williams is just too quick and powerful to be contained to less than 10 yards on 4 attempts.

The formation James (I believe, correct me if wrong?) was talking about last week, a shotgun equivalent for the run, which discarded all wide receivers for tight ends, line men, and backs, would have seen a nice debut there.

Instead of a wildcat, lets just call it the madbull haha.

by D-Ranged1 on Nov 9, 2009 7:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

On 3rd and 8 in opponents territory down by 3 with 4 minutes left in the game, I’m giving the ball to my best player. Our best player is D-Will. He gets a toss or hand off in that situation. And if he doesn’t get it, he gets the hand off on 4th down also.

I would rather be beat playing my game than be beat trying to be something I’m not.

by bwsmith25 on Nov 9, 2009 9:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs