Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Raiders' GM Begins The Purge

Falcons Drop Panthers 28-20

 

The fact the Panthers avoided the massive amount of turnovers like last week and kept this game close provides little consolation. The Panthers are 0-2 heading into a Monday Night game at Dallas. There will be a number of positives to take away from this game and several just the opposite. So here's the trusty old format the Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

The Good

QB Jake Delhomme rebounded with a decent stat line (25 for 41, 308, TD, INT) and only threw one INT...but it was at the worst time. His pick on 4th and Goal essentially sealed the Falcons win though the Panthers miraculously still had a prayers chance at the end. Delhomme was good enough in this game but he couldn't overcome a Panthers' defense that couldn't get off the field and a special teams unit anything but special. The Panthers were also 7 for 12 on 3rd downs and put up 440 yards of offense.

Star-divide

Double Trouble was very effective as Williams (79 yds, TD) mixed in his cut backs with Stewarts straight up the gut gashes. The Panthers took advantage of the passes out of the backfield to the RB effectively something I hope we continue to see. Steve Smith got heated up with 8 receptions for 131 yards though he failed to grace the end zone.

On defense LB Thomas Davis had 12 tackles and CB Richard Marshall had the seasons first INT. The rushing defense seemed better but still have up 150 yards and a score. They also produced a fumble recovery for a total of two turnovers. Not much else was positive except for maybe a couple good plays from rookie Captain Munnerlyn.

The Bad

The Panther pass rush was non-existent the entire game. Did they ever touch Matt Ryan? I don't think they even got a hit on him. When are the Panthers going to realize they have to bring pressure to get pressure?

The offenses red zone performance won't get it done long term either. In three trips the Panthers scored one TD and one FG. The Falcons in turn scored 3 TD's in four tries highlighting where the game was lost. RB DeAngelo Williams had his first fumbles in two seasons and it was a momentum killer. After the Panther created one of their precious turnovers via a Turner fumble Williams gave it right back.

The Ugly

This is an easy call, it's the special teams. P Brian Baker decided to inspect the ball before kicking it leading to a block and giving the Falcons a short field. In addition, after kicking a FG in the 2nd quarter to trim the lead to a point at 14-13 the coverage unit gave up a long run back leading to a half ending TD and Falcon 8 point lead. That one really hurt.

As easy as it is to decry the doom and gloom the truth at 0-2 the Panthers can turn things around and get back in the hunt. They simply have to focus week to week on the upcoming match-up and not worry about what the Saints and Falcons are doing. They have got to find a pass rush from somewhere and they have to fix special teams. If not the season could suddenly grow very long.   

Comment 71 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Kick a FG

I wasn’t here for the in game discussion, but what do you guys think about kicking a FG instead of going for it on 4th and long when the INT happened.

by ClaytonFire on Sep 20, 2009 9:39 PM EDT reply actions  

we wouldve lost anyways

we wouldve stopped them then probly gotten the ball back with less than a minute and then a heart stopping but dissapointing drop by jarret

by carolinabrave89 on Sep 20, 2009 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

No...going for it was the right call

just a bad throw by Jake

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 20, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

What else could Jake have done?

Run to the endzone? Yeah right. Nobody was open so he forced it to his best player. Atleast with the INT we pushed them back 10 yards from the line of scrimage.

on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city

by southtunnel on Sep 20, 2009 10:10 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

+1

Jake couldn’t have done anything more on that play. There was no seperation, he had to make a throw good or bad.

Problem is the #3 reciever spot. Teams will focus on the fact that all you need to do on a 3 or 4 wide set is double Smitty and cover Moose.

Jake threw for over 300 yards, we rushed for over 100… and couldn’t win. See the problem? Matt Ryan should never EVER be able to go 20-24. That is a joke.

I hope Chris Harris being added back into the lineup can give the secondary a spark. Right now, they’re a bunch of guys with no leader.

Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.

by James Dator on Sep 20, 2009 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

he could have led Smith more towards the corner

tough pass to make I agree and I don’t blame Jake for the loss. He played well and made some nice passes

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 20, 2009 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Week one the offense sucked, week two the defense sucked.

Maybe vs. Dallas we pull it all together

Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.

by James Dator on Sep 20, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Please explain. I’m really confused by this statement.

Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.

by James Dator on Sep 20, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Fine.

Week 1, offense sucked
Week 2, ST sucked
Week 3…

True Blue Jazz
I'm on Twitter
RIP Nick Adenhart. 4/9/09

by UtesFan89 on Sep 21, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions  

And in weeks one AND two...

…the special teams sucked. Out loud. Seriously. Major problems with that group and I’m afraid it’s going to haunt us all season long. Even if our offense and defense do manage to show up together in a game, I haven’t seen anything yet that makes me think the special teams unit will.

But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil

by NSpicer on Sep 21, 2009 7:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

You could argue the long run back at the end of the 1st half cost the game

Keep them at the 20 and they might have to settle for a FG or even don’t score.

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 21, 2009 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed

The special teams can make or break teams. In this case, they’re breaking us. Badly. I did LOL at the “sucked. out loud.” comment though – very fitting Neil.

by boywonderncsu on Sep 21, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions  

It would have been the right call to make.

I said so in the comment thread at the time. You’re expecting your team to make a 4th and 10 and then a 2 point conversion? The odds are so far against that it’s unbelievable. Had they kicked the field goal they would have been five points down, and they could have pinned the Falcons at the 20 and taken their chances on defense. As it turned out, they would have gotten the ball in much the same situation, but with more points on the board.

by Cyberjag on Sep 20, 2009 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

+1

I was wondering if other people felt the same way. Two low probability plays to tie, or a high probability play and trust your defense for the win?

by panthersnbraves on Sep 20, 2009 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

I disagree...

The way our defense played…and having been worn down all the way into the 4th quarter…I wouldn’t have counted on them stopping the Falcons and getting us the ball back. Neither would I have counted on the special teams unit to properly execute an onsides kick. So, going for it on 4th and long to try and score was fine with me. I just wish our playbook had some better plays our guys could reliably execute.

But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil

by NSpicer on Sep 21, 2009 7:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

We did get the ball back

The point here is, you have two low percentage plays your counting on instead of a high percentage scenario. If we were 1-0 I bet anything Fox would have kicked it.

by Cyberjag on Sep 21, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

the only optimism i can think of

is the 2007 giants were in a similar situation where they were 0-2 and changed defensive coordinators they went on to win 10 games that season and won the superbowl against the 18-0 pats.

oh and they started playing defense in week 2 so maybe MAYBE there is a ray of sunshine still left

by carolinabrave89 on Sep 20, 2009 10:01 PM EDT reply actions  

To get off to an 0-2 start...

With the schedule we have, looks like suicide.

All I can say us How bout them Bobcats???

on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city

by southtunnel on Sep 20, 2009 10:13 PM EDT via mobile reply actions  

Look at what we get after the bye

They’re Washington, Tampa Bay, Buffalo, Arizona. We have three hard ones then four winnable ones. If we can beat New Orleans we could and should be 5-3 at the half. Then we get revenge on Atlanta, Miami at home, the Jets just as Sanchez is hitting the rookie wall, and Tampa Bay again.

New England looks beatable this year, Minnesota will be easy at BofA, the Giants will be tough, but who knows? And then there’s New Orleans again at home.

This schedule is brutal in the beginning, but it’s easy in the middle and prepares us nicely for the playoffs at the end. Don’t give up hope. Given how we played today, that’s very premature.

by Cyberjag on Sep 20, 2009 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's true...

…the middle of the schedule is where the Panthers could make some hay. The only question is whether Atlanta and New Orleans stumble at all in playing mostly the same teams that we do. We’ve already spotted them both a 2-game lead. Making that up will be VERY difficult. If there’s a silver lining in there, at least the younger players (and the veterans trying to learn a new system on defense) will have time to improve over that stretch. So, by the time we get to last few games of our regular season, maybe everyone will be hitting their stride. I’m not sure how much stock I put in that. But it’s out there if the Panthers can take advantage of it.

by NSpicer on Sep 21, 2009 7:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

But history is against us

My stat yesterday was wrong. 13.8% of teams that start 0-2 make the playoffs.

They have to beat Dallas, and then they have to get hot after the playoffs. And if our defense doesn’t improve Arizona will nit be very winnable.

on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city

by southtunnel on Sep 21, 2009 8:56 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

Sorry *after the bye :)

on behalf of tha dirty south: soul food, carolina blue, southern hospitality, and tha queen city

by southtunnel on Sep 21, 2009 8:58 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

Say we improve as much between games two and three as we did between one and two...

We’ll be unbeatable! :)

I’m watching the Cowboys, and their defense is good but once you get past the line they’re vulnerable to huge gains. Could be a day of big plays. And Romo isn’t playing well at all.

Season isn’t over yet. Neither is the division race.

by Cyberjag on Sep 20, 2009 10:45 PM EDT reply actions  

Right now...

…the best thing going for us as we roll into Dallas is that Marion Barber might be unable to play. Of course, Dallas has a couple of backup RBs that can gash us pretty good, too. And I’m thinking Romo won’t have two bad games like that in a row. This one’s going to come down to preparation and injuries.

by NSpicer on Sep 21, 2009 7:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

Guys, this was a phenomenal improvement. Im heartbroken we didn’t win, but if we play better next week, we have a great shot!

by Zeus12888 on Sep 20, 2009 11:00 PM EDT reply actions  

Well...

I don’t normally post but after today’s game I thought it might be worth my two cents.
 - This game was a VAST improvement over week one. The offensive line looked like a whole different team. Last week we had a sieve in front of Delhome (not that it excuses his poor performance). Not their greatest game, but still, solid protection for the most part.
- The punt was the tip of the iceburg with special teams. As bad as that was (I agree, WAY too long to kick a ball), the kickoff team was much worse. It’s like the team never showed up (aside from stopping them at the 17 in the 4th quarter. The Falcons looked like all-stars with their protection.
- Defense was not their best but they did look better. My chief complaint is that the secondary seemed to be playing extremely soft coverage. I was blown away that we had people standing 5 yards deep in the endzone on two of the short touchdowns. I think you are right, Harris needs to be back there for leadership.
- Captain…wow, he stepped up today

That’s all I got aside from the pre-game show about Cower likely replacing Fox next year…weird.

by Wingedmind on Sep 21, 2009 12:08 AM EDT reply actions  

Why not use the TE?

Still wondering why were using a 3 WR set inside the redzone, considering that King and Rosario had more touches during the game than Jarrett or Moore. Our TE’s may not be the best, but I’d have King or Rosario playing WR before Jarrett. Either way, I think the Feely addition was a waste of cap space, as usual its our Secondary that needs help.

by carolina10 on Sep 21, 2009 12:55 AM EDT reply actions  

I agree about needing to utlize our TEs more in the red zone.

If there’s one thing Rosario has proved it that he can catch the ball. We need to lean on him more.

I disagree that AJ Feeley is a waste of cap space. He’s not getting paid very much and I never want us going into a season with 2 QBs again after 2007.

Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.

by James Dator on Sep 21, 2009 8:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

Niners Fan Here

Keep up the good work!

Merkin Valdez: As consistent a pitcher as Nabby's 5 hole. WE AINT IN THIS!

by joe579 on Sep 21, 2009 4:13 AM EDT reply actions  

Yeah...

…that pick we traded you guys is starting to look better and better every week.

by NSpicer on Sep 21, 2009 7:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

I thought CAR looked way better than I thought they would....

If this game was at CAR, I really do think the Panthers would have won…

I have six locks on my door all in a row. When I go out, I only lock every other one. I figure no matter how long somebody stands there picking the locks, they are always locking three.

Elayne Boosler

by NaGaNole on Sep 21, 2009 8:47 AM EDT reply actions  

Biggest shock of the night....

D-Will’s fumble….not every season you get to see that, lol

I have six locks on my door all in a row. When I go out, I only lock every other one. I figure no matter how long somebody stands there picking the locks, they are always locking three.

Elayne Boosler

by NaGaNole on Sep 21, 2009 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think Coach Fox should be fired for not kicking the field goal......

I know this could spark an argument but i really do think he needs to get fired for that call. He’s not an offensive cordinator, he is the hard coach. If we kicked the field goal, there would have been about 2:40 left on the clock. meaning two plays before the 2:00 minute warning and if you remember we had 3 timeouts left. What he just did tells the defense he doesn’t believe in them and that probably messed up their heads. He should have kicked the field goal and made lloyd pin them down in the 20. and they could have three and outs and we would at least get the ball back at our 30 with al least 1:40 left on the clock with at least 2 timeouts left. Let me know what ya’ll think about this as it irks me and am still angry about it. How can you go for it at 4&10 with Jake throwning the ball? they know he would be trying to force the ball to Smith, where was K. Moore any ways, he only had one catch. Bloggers, tell me what you think.

by panthertillidrop on Sep 21, 2009 8:59 AM EDT reply actions  

I think the way the defense was going he had to go for the TD. If the D had proven that they could stop anything all day, then I’d be right there with you, but they were allowing Turner 5.5 ypc in the 4th quarter. There wasn’t really any evidence the D could stop Atlanta.

I understand your PoV and it’s a tough call. But, Foxy is too often criticized for being ‘too safe’ and kicking FGs when he should have gone for it. So, i’m not going to come down on him for trying to send the game into OT.

Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.

by James Dator on Sep 21, 2009 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree

Fox has already made some fishy calls in the past, and this one no different. he really shouldn’t have panicked on that drive.

But on the other hand, I thought Jake did all he could, and he play very well this game. Good to see him bounce back after two horrendous games. I just can’t understand how we made Matty Ice look like Tom Brady yesterday.

by Shockers on Sep 21, 2009 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

What good would a FG have done?

Still need to score a TD and what says we would have gotten that close again? We could have kicked off and they could have ran it back to the 50. As it stands they got the ball deep but we still couldn’t hold them to a 3 and out. Kicking the FG was a moot point.

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 21, 2009 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

I don't get it...

Everyone complains that Fox is too conservative and should be fired. When he decides to gamble, they complain about that. MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!!

—btw, going for it on 4th down was the correct call.

by Scrantsj on Sep 21, 2009 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree : Kick the FG

However, i wouldn’t fire Fox over the deal.

You kick the FG and take the 3 points. Then you only need 6 for the win. And if Jarrett comes up with the hero play on the hail mary then its for the win not a tie (plus the two-point conversion pending.)

If Smith takes the ball away from Houston on the INT and the Panthers tie it up with a 2-point conversion, then Fox is praised. S o it really is a gamble. If i was the one making the bet, however, i would have kicked the FG — And been playing for the win not the tie.

by dudemanhey on Sep 21, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'll take a stab at explaining WHY we shouldn't have kicked the FG...

1) First, our offense was in MUCH better scoring range for a TD (which we’d have needed no matter what) at 4th and long than we’d have ever sniffed if we kicked the FG and tried for TD again later.

2) Assuming we DID kick the FG and then lined up for the ensuing kickoff, do you really trust our special teams to either a) properly execute an onsides kick, or b) to provide adequate kickoff coverage to pin the Falcons deep enough that we’d eventually get the ball back with any kind of field position to legitimately have a chance to try for a TD again later?

3) Even if we failed to convert on 4th down, it pins the Falcons with their backs against the endzone. That limits the number and types of plays they can risk running from there. And that sets our defense up for the stop better than if we’d kicked the FG and then asked them stop Atlanta on the ensuing kickoff.

4) Our defense let us down the whole darn game. Do you really think kicking the FG and putting the game in their hands was preferrable at that point than giving the offense (who’d been doing well most of the game) a chance to win it instead?

5) For those claiming that going for the TD still wouldn’t have been enough…i.e., that we’d have needed to succeed on two consecutive low-percentage plays to score the 2-point conversion to tie…did you stop to consider that even if we just made the TD and failed on the 2-point conversion, that still would have put us only 2 points behind…meaning, we’d only have to rely on our defense stopping the Falcons so we could get the ball back and score a FG…not a TD…to win? That’s a much more likely scenario than kicking the FG initially and then hoping for a shot at a TD later.

Lastly, and I won’t itemize this one in the list above, I think for all the clamor about Coach Fox putting a heap of pressure on the offense to execute two very unlikely back-to-back plays to score the TD and the 2-point conversion…it’s JUST as silly to contemplate kicking the FG instead and then putting the same heap of pressure on a special teams unit and your defense, both of whom had not delivered at all up that point in the game, to properly execute a decent kickoff and defensive series against an obviously better opponent in those two phases of the game.

I’m sorry. But going for the TD played to Carolina’s strengths far more than settling for the FG. And, for those worried about it sending a message of “distrust” and “lack of confidence” to the Panther defense…I say good. Send that message. They obviously need to hear it. Because they’re not getting it done for us.

But that’s just my nickel’s worth,
—Neil

by NSpicer on Sep 21, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Preach it...

brother Neil :) I agreed on every single point.

by boywonderncsu on Sep 21, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

But think about it like this....

Let’s say that they did get the TD and 2pc for the tie.

Then we give the give the ball back to Ryan and ATL with over 2 minutes, three time-outs, and the 2 minute warning. I repeat your own question back to you:

“4) Our defense let us down the whole darn game. Do you really think … putting the game in their hands was preferrable at that point than giving the offense (who’d been doing well most of the game) a chance to win it instead?”

Think about it. Our Defense would have to hold either way. Would you rather have them trying to stop an ATL offense trying to hold onto the lead, or an ATL offense gunning down field to get in FG range for the win?

by dudemanhey on Sep 21, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

Either way we lose...

Which way would you prefer to lose? Kick the FG and think “Darn, if only our defense could have gotten the ball back” or the way we actually lost? if we kick the FG but then don’t get a chance to score a TD you look pretty stupid.

If he makes the TD then we aren’t talking about it today. Miss the 2 Pointer? Well we had to go for it anyway right?

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 21, 2009 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

but the defense DID get the ball back so what's your point?

i think it would look stupider to score the TD, tie it up with a 2pc, and then let Matt Ryan, with over 2:30 left in the game, engineer the game winning drive and the panthers lose anyway.

Like you said we lose either way. I think what you fail to understand is that the Defense had to hold even if we had scored the tying TD. So if you think our D was incapable of holding the falcons anyway, then 2 and half minutes was plenty of time for ATL to score for the win.

by dudemanhey on Sep 21, 2009 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll say it as simply as I can...

…I’d much rather have our defense trying to hold Atlanta with 2:30 left in the game with the score TIED than HOPING they got the ball back for us after kicking a FG so we could THEN try to go for the win while still being BEHIND.

I’m sorry. I see your point. But I still disagree. That’s okay, though. We’re all entitled to do the “what if” game and have our own separate opinions about the decision-making. I’m just not going to criticize Fox on that one.

I think he made the right call.

He played to our strength (i.e., the offense) in that situation.

And that’s all I could ask of him as a fan and supporter of the team.

But that’s just my two-cents,
—Neil

by NSpicer on Sep 22, 2009 7:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

If we kicked the field goal

which team would have been more fired up?

by Cyberjag on Sep 21, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Atlanta...

…by holding us to a FG and retaining the lead with 2:30 left, their offense would have been plenty motivated to take it to us and run out the clock. Instead, by going for it on 4th down, I think it not only sent a message to the offense (i.e., “It’s on you to win this for us!”)…but it also sent a message to the defense when they failed to score, but had Atlanta pinned at the 5-yard line after the INT (i.e., “It’s on us to get it back for them…and we’ve got a good chance of doing so because of how backed up the Falcons are…so let’s pin back our ears and get after them.”)

If we’d just kicked the FG and still played from behind…then kicked off and given them the ball at the 20-yard line, there’s no pressure on Atlanta. They can run their full playbook without being backed up against the endzone. And I daresay our defense probably wouldn’t have gotten us the ball back at that point. But that’s just my opinion…

…and two-cents, ;-)
—Neil

by NSpicer on Sep 22, 2009 7:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

additionally, to your point # 2

The special teams wouldn’t have to hold them on the kick off if Lloyd does his only job and gets us a touchback.

by dudemanhey on Sep 21, 2009 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

I disagree...

Even if Lloyd did get the touchback, it’s a lot different for an offense like Atlanta’s to be running plays from the 20-yard line vs. the 5-yard line.

by NSpicer on Sep 22, 2009 7:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think you took the Panthers + 6 1/2...

and are sorry you didn’t cover the spread. LOL

by bigdavis on Sep 21, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

I’m feeling, not so bad right now. Dissapointed, but optimistic. We got to get ST playing better and do something about the 2ndary. I have never understood why fox plays his DB’s so far off.
Jake looked pretty good…good enough for what QB is supposed to do in our system. Just needs to be consistent. I’m scared of what happens after the bye b/c Jake’s arm doesn’t like by weeks.
Our day had moments yesterday but little consistency. Like I said last week. Beason’s knee will get stronger and he will play faster as we go forward. Can’t wait for Harris to get on the field to provide another spark to that side of the ball. I’m loving Captain Munnerlyn and still say that he and Goodson will make that SF trade very worthwhile. The Captain may be surplanting Marshall by midseason if he keeps it up.

by rawjem01 on Sep 21, 2009 9:17 AM EDT reply actions  

Jake's arm...

…didn’t like the bye weeks last year, because he didn’t throw during them. It tightened up. As long as he throws some during the week, he should be fine. Well, as fine as Jake can be.

by Scrantsj on Sep 21, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

What do you Guys think...

about Gamble? I’ve always liked him but he’s didn’t impress me much yesterday. Can he pull his play together and earn that nice check or is he just too soft?

by rawjem01 on Sep 21, 2009 9:20 AM EDT reply actions  

We need to get Harris back.

There’s no leader and too much youth in the secondary at the moment.

Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.

by James Dator on Sep 21, 2009 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

rawjem01- Gamble did not have a good game. No need to panic just yet.
The Defense was on the field too long yesterday.

by tarheelfan on Sep 21, 2009 9:24 AM EDT reply actions  

Agreed....

… Gamble did not have a good day yesterday, but let’s not get jumpy here.. the Defense, as a whole, has alot of room for improvement.

In both games, PHI & ATL, they stayed on the field far too long, effectively killing themselves. Play each and every play of every series as a “3 and out” opportunity and they might just begin to improve. The reward is rest while the offense takes the field. I know, Obvious Statement, but hey, SOMEONE has to say it…..

Let’s see how they do this coming week and hope for some improvement.

As far as Goodson…. I’m really liking this guy…. great pickup. I think we’ve stacked our run game sufficiently. D’Will, Stewart, and now Goodson… nice.

by 12th_Man_Fan on Sep 21, 2009 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

Interested in seeing improvement only......

… and I wasn’t disappointed.

Yes, the loss stinks, but it would have stunk even worse had there been no improvement after last week’s fiasco.

I’ve resolved myself that we are going to go 0-3 heading into the BYE week. (Not optimistic, I know, just a realistic approach.) While other teams were fine tuning their 1st string units during the pre-season, we were pre-occupied with talent evaluation at the expense of coaching and tuning our 1st string units. That work still needs to be done. Ignoring it didn’t make that work go away, and clearly, the 1st strings don’t just take the field and fire on all cylinders. So now we have to do what we should have already done. Coach and tune the 1st string units. At the expense of the 1st 3 games. Oh well. Resolved to the losses, I just want to see improvement so we can come out of the bye week as a competitive team. Having said that…….

The Offensive line showed remarkable improvement. That’s encouraging. For a unit that’s supposedly billed as one of the best in the league, their performance last week was the equivalent of “Rec. League – 10 yr. olds.” This week, MUCH better.

Delhomme – OBVIOUS improvement. Still has some issues with accuracy and decisions, but much better. 1 INT is nothing to get upset about. That’s part of the weekly game. (Brees\Brady\Romo\Manning all throw the occasional INT) What I liked was his attention to ball protection. If he continues to develop, he may just be in “regular season” form coming out of the Bye. My only knock on that is that his “regular season form” is hallmarked by inconsistency. You never know which Jake is going to show up. Therein lies the angst.

Defense – Do we even HAVE a secondary? I’m curious. I was astonished by the simplicity and ease with which ATL was able to pass-at-will on our defense. Watching the game, it seems like the attitude of our secondary was to “Let them make the catch, then tackle them.” Which, on the one hand, they did tackle pretty well. But on the other hand, isn’t the secondary supposed to “prevent” the catch? It really was remarkably frustrating to watch them getting torched by their own in-eptitude or perhaps, lax and soft zone coverage. Maybe it was the defensive schemes that was killing them, but they looked liked they weren’t even in the area to make plays. ATL had WR’s open all day long. Disappointing and frustrating. Secondary NEEDS to relearn their job, or adjust their schemes, because clearly, what they got right now ain’t working.

Special Teams…. well, the name says it all.

by 12th_Man_Fan on Sep 21, 2009 9:27 AM EDT reply actions  

If I didn't say it before...

welcome to the blog 12th Man fan.

Without a pass rush most QB’s in this league can pick apart of secondary. A pass rush would make the secondary look much better.

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 21, 2009 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

Thanks....

….. Agreed. Which brings up an interesting question:

What Improvements would you MOST like to see in next week’s performace?

by 12th_Man_Fan on Sep 21, 2009 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions  

Pressure

Pressure
and more pressure

That’s ALL we need on defense to get well.

by Cyberjag on Sep 21, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

What do all the Top defenses have in common?

An ability to get to the QB. Did the Panthers ever even knock Ryan down once?

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Sep 21, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nope...

…they chased him out of the pocket a couple of times. But no serious pressure.

by NSpicer on Sep 22, 2009 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

Mostly, I think...

…that’s just something we’re going to have to live with this year. Most of the guys on the special teams unit are young and inexperienced. Some probably haven’t even played special teams before, much less at the pro level. In addition, there were some rules changes regarding “wedges” on special teams this year. And that’s caused coverage units to spread out more and use faster guys to cover more ground. We just have really poor gap-control and tackling (even on defense sometimes).

by NSpicer on Sep 22, 2009 7:34 AM EDT up reply actions  

What Improvements would you MOST like to see in next week's performace?

Here are my thoughts…..

OFFENSIVELY:

TE – Get the TE’s more involved in the passing game. Over the middle to slow down the pass rush.

DEFENSE:
Overall:
Need better backfield penetration & a tighter secondary.
Would like to see more plays on the ball rather than the player.

Passing Game – NEEDS improvement. Any of these would suffice:
1) Corners need to be more aggressive, make plays on the ball, NOT the WR.
2) Pass Rush – A little pass rush\Pressure up front.
3) Playcalling\Schemes – These seem WAY out of alignment with what the offenses are putting on the field. WR’s are constantly open.

Run Game – Need more backfield penetration.

Special Teams
Better coverage – all around

by 12th_Man_Fan on Sep 21, 2009 10:06 AM EDT reply actions  

So........

…you’re saying our unis are ok?

by bigdavis on Sep 21, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Listen to Cat Scratch Radio Tuesdays 10pm EST

Media Requests email: CatScratchReader89@yahoo.com

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Desmond_pics467_small
The Carolina Panthers: One Fan's Journey
Gunnyhartman_small
CSR OT Open Thread, Vol. 8
Sir_purr_small
Decisions Galore for Panthers Front Office
Desmond_pics467_small
Why Not The Panthers?
Gunnyhartman_small
CSR OT Open Thread, Vol. 7

Recent FanPosts

Desmond_pics467_small
Hips Don't Lie: A Complicated Tale Of Verticals, Forties, And Other Fascinating Numbers
Small
A Possible New Free Agent DT Target?
1285514838068_small
Newton change to #2?
Small
Another Possibility for Cam’s Backup
Cam_smith_small
How Injury Has Plagued Our Draft Board
Small
Second Attempt at the 2012 Offseason and Draft
Small
Average Draft Position, Top 15 Picks, From 6 Top Mock Drafts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Catscratchreader_m_small Jaxon

091311101554_small James Dator

Editors

N1523447507_30151367_6579_small Cyberjag

Img_0764_small LittleKing

Gunnyhartman_small BW Smith

Authors

Unnamed_small Revshawn

Mphg_small Rick Bates

Img_0050_small BrandonBecker

Social Media

Small TLong