Cautiously Optomistic

Actually the quarterback is all that would change, and will continue to change in this. It does look like a free agent pickup will be our starter next year. This staff won't want to develop a quarterback.
But what happens when we bend the rule just once and go overpay McAllister to play his sloppy style of corner?

By the way, you're thinking of 2000. 1999 Seifert actually had control over his own building philosophy.

 

Just say no.

Corner is still a need, but it's falling.

I say we get a mid priced RT, a mid priced corner, and, oh, say Mark Brunnell. Draft WR, DT, a guard/tackle, and depth.

 

Agree Piper. That said I would guess that Charles Rogers leads the way for Panther hopefuls. We might need to move up with recent fortunes but here are Charles' stats:

2002 Game Log Receiving Rushing
DATE & OPP RESULT REC YDS AVG TD
8/31 E Michigan Win 56-7 4 138 34.5 1
9/7 Rice Win 27-10 9 155 17.2 2
9/14 California Loss 46-22 9 166 18.4 1

2001 Game Log Receiving Rushing
DATE & OPP RESULT REC YDS AVG TD
9/8 C Michigan Win 35-21 3 72 24.0 0
9/22 @N Dame Win 17-10 4 116 29.0 1
9/29 @N'western Loss 27-26 5 68 13.6 0
10/13 Iowa Win 31-28 1 13 13.0 1
10/20 @Minnesota Loss 28-19 7 91 13.0 1
10/27 @Wisconsin Win 42-28 5 206 41.2 2
11/3 Michigan Win 26-24 6 86 14.3 1
11/10 Indiana Loss 37-28 4 81 20.3 1
11/17 @Purdue Loss 24-14 7 108 15.4 1
11/24 Penn State Loss 42-37 8 191 23.9 2
12/1 Missouri Win 55-7 7 168 24.0 2
12/31 @Fresno St Win 44-35 10 270 27.0 2

Totally impressive IMO. Rogers is a bigtime difference maker with all the tools. Should be a star in the NFL early on.

 

We'll probably be choosing from the 3rd or 4th best WR based on just these two wins - there should be a good number of 2-3 win teams this year since there are so many near-unbeatables - which, if it's Andre Johnson, ain't bad. Right now I'd say the top two QBs will probably be gone - it's funny. QBs are always either top five or 20-35 rated, and then randomly on down.

The top two DTs should be gone as well. If we could get a Kindal Moorehead in the 2nd...

 

what's wrong with this plan -- and winning games? i didn't see anywhere in your plan that says they have to lose.

i say try as hard as they can and let the chips fall where they may. if they don't have the talent to win, so be it. i don't think they have the talent to finish over .500 -- but this is a crazy league and if you play error-free and don't beat yourself, you'll have a shot to win 3/4 of your games in the 4th quarter.

i'm just saying that it's nice to be 2-0. you know, before the season started, i said that i didn't care what teh record was -- i just wanted to see progress.

well, i've seen it. a nice by-product of that progreess has been 2 wins.

 

Yep. No turnovers is huge. If they do that in Minnesota, and GB, they'll win.

 

You're pointing out the problem Larry D. This was sold as a rebuilding year and now people are unrealistically talking playoffs after two games. What happens when things start going wrong and the team starts losing a few? How do the fans react and how does the team react? JR is pushing the win now mandate because he's taking a huge finacial hit in the shorts. So much for his new found patience.

Sure these guys need to learn how to win, the only difference between the two camps is how they accomplish that goal. Me and a few others would rather try and do it with guys we know are going to be here after the final game this year, as I pointed out earlier the win at cost reasoning is what got us in this mess to start with.

Review the plan again and tell me for certain which parts of it have been implemented at any time by the franchise. You'll find it to be few and far between and the one or two that are are being persued half heartedly. I'll run down what I see being done and you tell me if you agree.

Phase One-selectively, so far Moose, Minter, and Rucker. We have to do better.

Phase Two-we can agree we're getting the job done for the most part, It'll be complete when Gilbert's ass is on a Greyhound.

Phase Three-nowhere near being done. This is the best money a front office can spend outside of player's salaries. Improved scouting can lead to less money spent on FA's in the long run.

Phase Four-We've been burnt so many times in FA we're getting gun shy. That's why I called for a scout to do nothing but look at potential FA's. Have him do evaluations and get CREDIBLE medical info on the guys he's looking at. Have Fox and the staff give him the criteria he's to look for. Compile the scouting reports from other teams and see how he performs in certain situations. Know the guys tendencies in and out. Will he fit what we're doing or will it be as Henning said, putting a square peg in a round hole?

Phase Five-we've come around to that type of thinking thank God. Rucker got a little more than market value upfront on his new deal, but by the end of the contract, I'd say he's at or below market value. Phase One and Phase Five work hand in hand. Lock 'em up young and long term (5 years max) if possible if the potentials there.

Phase Six-the last two drafts stand out for the quality guys we've picked, but the long term history of the franchise isn't something to be proud of. If we have the rest of the plan in place, we can pretty much expect drafts along the lines of the last two instead of the first six. This will give the team a long term foundation to build upon.

 

I don't see how benching a fourth round pick for a 36 year old journeyman is "win now." That's all that's changed.

We are doing what you suggest. Draft well. Reisgn your key guys. Supplant with mid-priced to cheap FA. No overspending.

FA has worked out well so far. Fields and Cousins have played well. Smith has been adequate with Foster out. Considering our cap problems, Hurney did a good job supplanting with cheap FA, and did it with very little contract renegotiations. Most of them were just flat out pay cuts.

It's not like we went out and paid big money for Ferrotte and Armstead. Those passes look pretty good right now.

 

i asked you a very simple question to which you gave me a long convulted answer that has nothing to do with the essense of the question i was asking. i realize now that my question "what is you plan?' was stated a bit too simply. my only excuse is that i thought it obvious that i was asking what your plan was for THIS SEASON. I apologize. So let me ask it now:

What is your plan for THIS SEASON?

for instance, you say "Me and a few others would rather try and do it with guys we know are going to be here after the final game this year." I'd like to know:

Exactly who you are having a problem with the coaches playing, who you would play and what you would do ... ya know to develop our QB for the future, etc.

i'd also like you to share your plan regarding your statement "but how the staff adapts the personel to overcome the team's shortcommings will say alot".

How would you overcome the team's shortcomings? Also explain if "overcome shortcomings" means as in winning games this season. I would think you mean as in win games this season as you also state "I'm not ready to proclaim Fox and Co. geniuses YET. They're gonna have to show me improvement." If it does mean as in win games this season then also explain how ya gonna do this and still not mortgage our future by not developing whoever it is that you think we not developing."

And finally, (I gotta make this short as my mother is wanting me to come to breakfast), explain:

How do we get guys to sign extended contracts and get FA to join our team at reasonable sums when we have been such losers and if we would forfeit games, which i think you were petty much advocating, would continue to be losers this season.

one more quick question. you state "as I pointed out earlier the win at cost reasoning."

Exactly what costs do you see that were extracted by our winning the first 2 games. Please be specific."

You have called me an idiot and a crackhead so I'm thinking that the solutions to all our problems are simple. So I'm thinking it should be easy for you to share a clear and definitive answer to my above questions.

Oh and please don't bother giving me any rose-colored answers about doing a better job of selling a 1-15 team to FAs or hiring a few more scouts so that we would have perfect foresight in knowing how FAs and draftees will work out. Granted, the franchise had a lousy record prior to the last 2 years. That's been well-documented numerous times by folks with a whole lot more insight than you. In the last 2 years it would appear that we are doing a good job of getting the right guys in here, so I really don't think we need your input in that area.

Thanks for all your help in my education.

 

HeadCase, it isn't about this season. It's about the long term. You want things now and that's not the way to build the team long term. If you can't understand that it's your problem not mine.

Musical QB's is no way to get it done. If the staff had a problem with Weinke they should have gotten either Peete or Fasani more playing time with the first unit. It reflects poor planning.
Leaks to the press before informing the players also show a lack of control over the coaching staff and front office also. The problem I have isn't with Weinke hitting the pine, it's in the way it was handled. It has the potential if another decision like this comes down the pike of turning us into Team Tabloid.

If Peete is indeed their man, why no move to lock him in for after this year? If they have lost all confidence in Weinke, why wasn't it Fasani doing mop up duty last week? Why is Weinke still here for that matter?

When have I said to forfeit games? Those are your words not mine. Do you really think that you are better off winning a few games this year using guys who aren't going to be here benefits the team when those guys spots are going to be holes on the roster again next year and the guys you have left on the roster have gotten ZERO experience? It 's like a dog chasing it's tail. What I am saying is get the younger guys some PT along the way so you can make a better evaluation on whether or not they may be the long term answer. You can't see the forest for the trees.

You want an answer about adapting to the teams shortcomings? It happens on every team every week. There are mismatches in every game. Do we let Howard handle Moss on his own Sunday or do we use Cousin to do it? Do we play a nickel package the majority of the time and let the nickel help Howard or Cousin? Do we single cover Alexander? It boils down to coaching decisions. Sorry that was so difficult for you to understand, but then again you do proclaim yourself to be a casual fan. It shows.

You build a team mainly through the draft. Many point to the last two years picks and granted we have gotten some good players, but take a look at what's left on the roster from the first six drafts.
You aren't going to find many that are still here and starting. '95 draft-0, '96 draft-Moose plus a backup CB McDaniel who was cut then resigned this year. '97 draft-Minter plus Mangum a backup TE, '98 draft-Richardson a backup S, '99 draft-Rucker, Terry (who's on thin ice IMHO), and Navies who can't stay healthy long enough to prove himself worthy of hanging onto. Not to even broach the subject of Gilbert who cost us the #5 overall in '99 and #12 overall in '00. Six drafts, five starters, one of which hasn't played a full season since he's been here. Not a very good track record considering we've had 13 additional picks over the minimum 7 picks per draft in that time frame.

Not many of us would trade the experience of the '96 season for anything, but the way the team was built from day one has hurt us long term. Too heavy a concentration on vets and overpriced has been FA's and not enough on youth and developing players for the long term. Waiting six years into the franchise's history to build a young base of talent has killed us the last few years.

Mortgaging the future? Haven't we tried this already? Gilbert, Hitchcock, Evans, White, Chuck Smith, Barrow, Etc, Etc, Etc? I'm talking rewarding our own guys who produce before buying high dollar guys on the FA market . We stepped up with Moose, Minter, and Rucker, but we waited until the last minute to do so. What I'm saying is if a guy produces, don't wait until his contract is in it's last year or already expired to do something. You offer a guy long term security before he has a chance to even think about FA and he's more than likely going to jump at the deal. You don't think locking in Morgan, Jenkins, or Steve Smith aren't worth looking at earlier while the team may still have some leverage instead of letting them hit the open market and upping their price is wise? Sure there'll be a need to sign FA's to fill holes, but getting your own guys under contract tends to limit those holes.