Tuesday, October 7, 2008

2003 vs 2008 Panthers continued...

My column in today's Observer focused on the similarities between the 2003 and the 2008 Panthers.
Here's the link. There are about 30 comments down there at the bottom right now if you want to check out some back-and-forth stuff from fans who believe the Panthers will win the Super Bowl this year and fans (some of other teams) who are dissing them.

Anyway, there were a couple of other things I wanted to share with you. The first is about today's column -- a fact I didn't have time to explore much: There's only one defensive holdover from the 2003 team. One!!

That would be Julius Peppers of course. But 10 of 11 defensive starters have changed! This, I believe, is endemic of the way the NFL goes: QBs can last a long time. WRs can last a long time (Marvin Harrison, Muhsin Muhammad, etc). Offensive linemen can hold on for 10-15 years. RBs hardly ever can. But I think, as a whole, defensive players just don't last as long as offensive players. Five of the 11 offensive starters from the '03 Super Bowl team are still around (Smith, Muhammad, Delhomme, Hoover and Gross).

Also, for the last couple of months I've been doing double duty online, starting this "Scott Says" blog as well as continuing the "Fowler Q and A" on sports that I've done for several years for charlotteobserver.com.

Honestly, I'm enjoying the blog more. Plus, it's getting about 10 times the hits of the Q and A at the moment. So I've shut the Q and A down, as of today, after 4,745 questions answered. Makes me tired just thinking about it.

This is the point I wanted to make, though: I read every comment on this blog. So if you really want to ask me a question publicly, you can still do so here and I'll try to answer it. Or, if you want a more private forum, just e-mail me at sfowler@charlotteobserver.com. Thanks to all of you who have read this blog and/or participated in my Q and A forum over the years -- I appreciate you all very much.

3 comments:

Jon said...

Scott:
Did you notice - prior to the Saints-Vikings game, of course - that every team in the NFC South was undefeated at home after a total of nine games (3 for CAR, and 2 for NO, TB and ATL? That's an extrodinary fact to me. The only other division to even come close to that at this point is the NFC East (widely recognized as the strongest division in football this season) with a total of two home team losses (DAL hosting WAS and WAS dropping one to the NY G-men) out of 11 games. Does this mean we have a significantly stronger division than most of America thinks? I sure think so. Your thoughts on this?...

Dan Dove said...

I'll say it if no one else will: Thanks for doing the Q & A, Scott! I can't remember if I ever posed a question, but I definitely read it from time to time. Keep up the good work on the blog!

Scott Fowler said...

First of all, to Dan, thanks. The Q and A was a labor of love and I'm glad you enjoyed it. As to your interesting question, Jon, no, I hadn't noticed this. The NFC South is now 9-1 total in home games this season -- best in the NFL. The next best is the NFC East, as you mention, at 9-2. What does this mean? I think it means the NFC South is a bit underrated at the moment -- Atlanta just went to Green Bay and beat the Packers, too, remember. There are no "easy outs" in either the NFC South or East at the moment. Certainly the NFC East is football's best overall division at the moment, but I won't be surprised at all if the NFC South gets 2 of the 6 NFC spots in the playoffs.