Great Job on the win Panthers! Now here's why I still think we should fire Jeff Davidson.
by Revshawn on Dec 22, 2009 4:54 AM EST
19 comments
What is there to say?
I'm going to repeat the same thing that I've said since the beginning of the season. This is a championship caliber team. It always has been, and they've proved it yesterday against the Vikings. We have too much talent at too many areas of the game to not be able to slaughter anything the NFL throws at us. At the beginning of the season, we only had 3 small holes in an otherwise superb unit. QB, WR, and DT.
We solved the hole at DT in Week 3 or 4 by signing Hollis Thomas, and our defensive line has been unstoppable ever since. If Matt Moore can consistently have the day that he had against the Vikings, we'll also have a answer at QB. The only other hole we have is at WR, but we have an uncoverable receiver in Steve Smith so that nullifies our weakness there a good bit. As long as we can hit Steve Smith on the deep ball 2-3 times a game, we should be good to go.
Yet in spite of our win against the Vikings, as wonderful as it was, we still have to blame the people upstairs for placing us in a position to not make a serious run at the playoffs. Just imagine how it would feel right now if we had Matt Moore as our QB and our record was 8-6 or 9-5 instead of 6-8? We'd all be throwing fits right now. The Panthers would be in perfect position for a Wildcard, a remake of the 2003 run to the Super Bowl. Our storyline would be perfectly written out.
But instead we're 6-8, and regardless of our win against the Vikings, we still have to place full blame on the offensive coordinator, and John Fox for not being able to pull him aside and slap him in the face a few times.
Settle down for a moment after this big win, and ponder with me for a moment. Ponder this: What would have happened if Deangelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart had been given 20 more carries against the Cowboys, the Bills, and the Dolphins. We came into those games with a pass heavy offense where Jake threw a combined 119 passes for 2 touchdowns and 6 interceptions. In spite of Jake struggling, we still decided to give the ball to him time and time again. He rewarded us by killing drives, and Jeff Davidson in turn rewarded him by giving him the ball to throw yet again the next drive.
I don't want to cry over spilled milk here, but doesn't that sound kind of stupid to you? Doesn't there reach a point in time where you realize that you don't have a Quarterback, and you start to depend more on the running game?
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that our team has risen to the heights that I believed they could go. I am. I'm proud of them, and it brings me a great amount of joy to see them thump Brett Favre and his Vikings. But at the same time, we deserve so much more than this. If we had been calling the plays off our team's strength for the entire year, we'd be 8-6 or 9-5 right now and ready to make a run at the playoffs. Instead, Jeff Davidson was too stubborn to change his playcalling, and he continued to pass the ball no matter who was behind center. It was almost as if he felt like he should call his game plan regardless of whether it worked or not, as if he cared about the mere principle of running it more than actually winning the football game.
In the end he let the NFL, a passing league, define us instead of allowing the Panthers to define themselves. That is why we have a losing record. That is why we are not going to the playoffs.
And that is why Jeff Davidson needs to be fired.
I'll cheer our victory tomarrow and the rest of the week though! Just thought I'd get my own personal opinion out there first. I just finished off my last high school credit by the way. I'm a high school graduate.
The content of these posts are those of the person/idiot making the post only
0 recs |
19 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
"If Matt Moore can consistently have the day that he had against the Vikings, we'll also have a answer at QB."
If Matt Moore can consistently have the day he had against the Vikings, he’ll finish third in NFL history in TDs and sixth in passing yards. Something tells me that’s not sustainable.
Also, just imagine how it would feel right now if we had Matt Moore as our QB and we were 4-8 or 3-9. People would be throwing fits right now. Well, maybe not, they’d still hate Delhomme and stay convinced he couldn’t help.
And finally, the Bengals, Ravens, Cowboys, Giants, and Saints disagree about whether this is a passing league. And don’t come back with me about the Saints. In a year, they’re going from 8-8 to 13-3 at the worst. And what’s the difference? Their rushing game. They went from 28th in the league at 99.6 YPG to 5th at 133.6.
Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE
Cmon Procton, you and I both know that's not what I meant.
1. If Matt Moore can continue to post numbers like he did during the Vikings game, we’d be in much better shape now. That’s not the point of the article though. The point was that Jeff Davidson called the plays on the sideline like he didn’t care whether Jake could pull it off or not. That is his game plan, and he’s sticking to it. Someone that cannot be flexible with his game plan and adjust to constantly changing conditions has no business in being a coach.
2. No point in arguing what if’s. What difference does it make? We’d still be trying to kick Delhomme to the curb, right along with Jeff Davidson.
3. Bengals and Saints both got a defense. Ravens got a new QB that doesn’t suck. Cowboy’s Romo fails in December/January in previous years which is the reason they weren’t decent, and the Giants did not win the Super Bowl till Eli Manning caught fire.
Not to mention all of the various rule changes that have helped out the passing game in recent years, most recently the renewed emphasis on pass interference starting in 2004. It’s a passing league Proccy, I assure you. Doesn’t mean that teams that run the ball consistantly can’t be successful.
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
One last thing.
Didn’t we get a team in the Super Bowl recently that ranked dead last in the league in rushing?
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
Yes.
And they were beaten by a team that ranked 11th.
Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE
by MichaelProcton on Dec 22, 2009 10:23 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, by four points.
Only 58 yards rushing by the Steelers that game too.
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
If there's no point in arguing what if's...
There’s no point in mentioning them as part of a persuasive argument.
Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE
by MichaelProcton on Dec 22, 2009 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
The end result is the same.
Either way, we’re firing Jeff Davidson at the end of the season anyway.
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
First off, congratulations on getting your diploma!
Now about Davidson…
What bothers me most about him… is that he tries to get a little to cute with his playcalling. It is almost as if the strengths of our team don’t matter to him. It is like he is in his own world playing Madden 10 in his head… but on that team he has all custom players with maximum stats, and can do whatever he wants when he wants.
There is nothing wrong with using a great rushing attack to set up a playaction pass or a deep ball against single coverage… and that is what you should do. FOR ONE PLAY. Maybe on a first down, or a second and short, give it a shot. If it doesn’t work, go back to your tried and true running game. Don’t keep throwing passes that will just fall incomplete, or worse, be intercepted.
Thankfully, Moore seems to be someone we can count on to complete a pass and pick up some yardage in between run plays, which is all we can ask for in an offense such as ours. He has shown that he can throw a pretty deep ball, and the single coverage resulting from our dominant rushing attack is easily beaten by Smitty.
I agree with you Tater, and thank you! ^^
I’m still going to withhold on Matt Moore though. We all have to remember, he’s had 11 other quarters he’s started where he overthrew balls, didn’t look comfortable in the pocket, and he couldn’t seem to find his groove. If this is the spark that starts a successful career in Carolina, than so be it. I guarantee you I won’t be complaining.
I’ll always wonder what would happen if Matt Moore took this team into the playoffs. Ah well, guess we can’t do anything but fire Crossman and Jeff next year. I can’t wait to see a special teams unit that actually gives a crap.
Oh! And I still love Ron Meaks by the way.
"Once again the trousers of evil are yanked down by the mocking hands of justice!"-Revshawn
Your first paragraph nails the problem with Davidson.
I think Davidson is probably a pretty good X’s & O’s kind of guy but in the NFL the best coaches are those that recognize the strengths of ther players and call a game that puts the players in the best position to succeed based on the players abilities and not their own genius.
I actually think he did a good job of that in Sunday’s game.
I agree
Something that probably helped his playcalling on Sunday was that we were able to run the ball efficiently against a team known for stuffing the run and forcing the pass. Even with reserves at both tackle spots, and D-Lo going down early, we were able to make the Vikings respect that running game. This made our game plan, which probably included more passing than usual due to the Vikings reputation as running game killers, that much more effective.
The plan all along was to throw more against the Vikings. The running game, for a change, was a surprise against a physical Vikings D. He didn’t need to deviate from the game plan.
His weakness seems to be adjusting when a game plan is not going the way he expected. The loss to the Bills was even more unforgivable, as the game plan WAS working… and he decided to abandon it.
It's plenty easy when they're sending secondary receivers out in space to get wide open for five and six yard catches.
I didn’t see those routes from the RBs and TEs when Delhomme was under center.
Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE
by MichaelProcton on Dec 22, 2009 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
II'm saying they're dumbing down the gameplan for Moore.
Overheard in press box, from local reporter: 'If this Moore kid was any good, they'd be up 31-0 right now.'
--Darin Gantt, on CAR@NE
by MichaelProcton on Dec 22, 2009 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
Dumbing down, or opening up?
Can’t send the RBs and TEs out if you’ve got to protect a snakebit QB.
Yet here's what you said at 9:05 in the Game Day Open Thread:
“Where were these plays to get receivers in space earlier this year?”
At that time, you saw “dumbing down the playbook” in a different light, eh?
Instead of dumbing it down, maybe it’s a matter of more creative and successful play calling, and better execution by a QB who can SEE a secondary receiver who’s open.
You’re calling something that worked (and got us a win in a game nobody expected us to win, scoring 20 points in the 4th quarter from the offense alone) dumb?? That’s what dumb.
Oh, and BTW, Steve Smith is no “secondary receiver” and he’s the guy who caught 9 of those 21 dumbed down pass completions.
If you’re getting tired yet of my calling you out on nonsensical, illogical posts, say something insightful and intelligent for a change.
Congrats, Revshawn
Nice post. Too bad 1/3 of the replies to date have been nitpicking what you had to say.
In a small defense of the OC, let me say that we won the game against Minnesota with more than our defense, though they played with the spirit and abandon that we could only hope would be there every game. It was in large part due to the 20 points we put on them in the fourth quarter, and the OC gets credit when he calls a successful game lan, just as you rightfully criticized him for poor play-calling in earlier losses.
But how much of the 4th qtr success is attributable to execution being better than in previous games? It’s interesting that Ryan Kalil, who’s been there for every game, thinks it was a lot. He makes the point that lack of execution, of plays that were there for the making, is what cost us those early losses. I think he’s right. We’ve now had only 1 turnover in the last 3 games! Who would’ve thought, say 9 games ago, when our turnover ratio was the worst by far in the league, that by now we’d get it back to only -1??
For whatever reason, adjustments have been made in ball security that have reduced lost fumbles — and with Matt Moore only tossing one INT in his 3 games, vs the 18 for Jake in the first 11, we’ve made great improvements. I guess I’m saying that, had we eliminated the turnovers early on, we wouldn’t be castigating Davidson with such vigor. Some of that credit goes to Moore, who has evaded the rush on enough occasions to show he has a mobility advantage over Delhomme, if nothing else.
And Moore is more willing to go to his checkdown
Something Delhomme seemed incapable of. That allows our wideouts who are great after teh catch like Smith, Stewart, Williams, Rosario and Barnidge to run and help out like they did Sunday.
The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
by Flowing Willow on Dec 23, 2009 10:38 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
