Proehl Article

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/sports/football/nfl/carolina_panthers/13386939.htm

I'm surprised to hear anything from Ricky


"It's our job to give (Smith) a hand and help him out and take some of the pressure off him," Proehl said. "That's why I think there are times we can go three wide and do some things to exploit a defense."

 

he was calling out the play calling. finally, someone from the inside speaking up.

 

yeah, and he doesn't care because he's outta here in a few months anyway. I think everyone on the offense is down-trodden because of it. They have no faith in the plays called, it's like they are going through the motions.

 

Shortly after the game, I heard on 1110 Al Wallace mention our game plan not working. I was on the ramps heading out and could not hear everything he said.

 

I might add as far as bad playcalling yeaterday, a coupla examples:

Offense.
On first drive, third and 2, after Foster was tearing it up running, we call a fuked up pass play (not a smoke or quick slant or something short just to get two)- I woulda run Foster. But also, not only did we not run, call a non-short quick pass play, we go empty backfield. That was dumb. It shoulda been p/a or and/or very quick pass with Foster in the backfield. Kasay misses, that was the game. Next series run 3X, 3 and out. Later, run, run, pass, 4th and 3, Davis up the middle. Fuck.

Defense: Tied 0-0. It's 3rd and 13, Bucs on our 45. We only rush three, pass complete for 18. (nmaybe not correct numbers, but close from memory.)
They coninue drive to TD.

Our cover was bad so at times I was yellin instead of jellin. They sent two in pattern, we have 5 in coverage, recievers wide open, get first downs. Bazzaar.

Our inconsistency and non-adaptability is maddening.

 

Hurney defended the play calling in the post game interview, and called Henning "one of the best in the league".

 

Does Hurney watch the games, or actually know anything about football?

 

I wouldnt say we are Non-adaptable...we are inconsistently adaptable and yes that is maddening.

 

re: Proehl
"We've got to protect the quarterback, so we had to keep some personnel in that normally we don't," Proehl said. "That's because they're a great defense."

That's exactly why we didn't use many 3 WR formations. We actually gave help to Wharton, as so many people have been bitching at Henning to do. Now he does it and people are bitching at him for doing exactly what they said they wanted. Look, it's fine to criticize the play-calling, but you have to be consistent. You can't say one thing one week and then disagree with the same thing you wanted that week when we actually do it. And for the record, Tampa Bay rarely used 3 WR formation on offense all day, but they did just fine.

It was 3rd and about 2.5 from the 25. I'm looking at the play right now and there are eight Tampa defenders in the box between the line of scrimmage and the 20 yard line. Delhomme's first read was Smith on a shallow cross, but Brooks had it covered. Maybe we were expecting man there and figured Smith's man would be trailing him, thus allowing a completion, but they were playing zone and it wasn't open. Jake's next read was the TE on a slant, but he was also covered. Note that all this time Jake was back-peddling, in part because pressure was forcing him back, but he didn't have anyone within three yards of him when he threw it from just inside the 35 yard line. Foster came back for the ball and it would have been a completion if Jake had stepped into the throw, but he didn't have enough behind it and it fell a yard short.

So while I'm fine with you saying you would have preferred trying a run (even though they had 8 men between the tackles within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage), but the play could have and should have worked. A poor throw by Jake off his back foot when he had room to step into it is the reason it didn't. Seriously, I just watched the play again and suggest that you do the same.

The next series was also a 3rd and 3. You said you wanted a run in that situation the first time, but you criticize a run in that situation the second time. You need to be consistent or your complaints will not appear to be logical.

Get your facts straight before posting, please. That later series was actually pass, pass, run (with an offsides penalty after the second pass) before the 4th and 2. And as noted repeatedly, the hole was open for Davis to get the first down on that play, he just plowed into the pile instead of making a very simple cut back to the wide open hole.

As explained in another thread, when the opposing offense is using a max protection scheme, sending more linemen and/or blitzers actually plays into their hands because they have the blockers in to give the QB time. A 3 man rush with 8 men dropped actually is a great defensive call on a 3 receiver pattern, we just have to cover the 3 receivers. And on that play, we actually brought up all our linebackers to give the appearance of a blitz, but Simms didn't check into something quick for whatever reason. It looks like Galloway's route was a deep stop or comeback, while Pittman ran a 7 yard out underneath him. You can't see the coverage as they're going downfield, but when the camera shifts over it looks like Thomas Davis may have been out of position in the zone. That and Lucas gave way too much cushion given that he still had Minter behind him. I assume we ran a three deep shell that play, and maybe Lucas continued downfield thinking it was a streak when Galloway broke off the route. Whatever happened, it was a problem of execution and not play-calling.

I actually had other issues with the play-calling, like constantly relying on that three deep shell (it should work for a 3 receiver pattern, but when they're using 4 or 5 then we need to play tighter) and using the same running play over and over again. I just think we need to be accurate about which plays were probably the fault of the coaches and which plays were probably the fault of the players.

 

Collin, I believed I put a little disclaimer about the fact was I was complaining from memory.
So yeah, my facts may have been a little off.

But as far as consistent:

Yes, run on the first 3rd and 2.5. The defense was reeling a tad and our run game was smoking. Even so, we shoulda at least done playaction on that play considering the previous run success if we were to pass. It seems we forgot all about that yesterday. Playaction and short passes. Not a single empty backfield set play was successfull yesterday that I can remember.

On the next series, TBs D had only been on the field 3 plays. So, I'm not sitting here, mad as hell for their play yesterday, saying every dang 3rd and two or three they shoulda run, and that somehow, would be more consistent.

Also, There was a big hole for Davis to run thru. And he didn't get it done. I don't expect him to anymore, so we shoulda run Foster on that play instead, or passed, IMO.

What happened to screens?

It's like we always forget from week to week what we do to make us successful, and lotsa times go back to the very thing we aren't.


I know you can't do the same things to different teams, but it's like the coaches says, "Guys, this is only what we are gonna do this week, cause we think it's gonna work, and if it doesn't, fuk it, we're gonna keep doing it till it does".

And many times it never does. The sad fact is all the games we've lost this year it would seem we just didn't plan or play worth a damn. Instead of just getting beat while playing their asses off, adjusting, but not finding a way to win.

No adjustments, no heart, just poor plain ass generic BS play. 4 times, L. In fact, IMO we've gotten lucky and won a couple despite the fact those games were played like that as well by us.