« Fox Q&A | Main | Brooks: Nothing can rival Bucs-Panthers »

October 06, 2008

The magic number

From "The things that make you go hmmm" Department:

Thirty-four was clearly the number of the day Sunday at Bank of America Stadium.

The Panthers thumped Kansas City 34-0 and the player of the game was undoubtedly Carolina's No. 34, DeAngelo Williams.

Williams rushed for 123 yards and scored three touchdowns in the best performance of his NFL career.

It just so happened to be his 34th game with the Panthers.

-- Charles Chandler

Posted by Observer Sports on October 6, 2008 at 03:12 PM | Permalink


Not to mention 34 is approximately the number of times per week that the Proctologist says that Deangelo can not be a great running back in the NFL. Nevermind that he is averaging 4.3 YPC and on pace to break 1000 yds WHILE sharing time almost evenly with Stewart (75 carries to 64). Yeah, he sucks...

Posted by: Steve | Oct 6, 2008 4:46:06 PM

Here's to winning 3 superbowls in the next 4 years

Posted by: JamesQC | Oct 6, 2008 5:10:37 PM

It can happen !

Posted by: harrydogg | Oct 6, 2008 6:20:46 PM

Yall are gettin a lil ahead of yourselves

Posted by: paul | Oct 6, 2008 8:10:16 PM

DeAngelo's game was nowhere NEAR as good as his numbers indicated. Just like always, he ran free when the blocking was perfect and he didn't have to take on contact. If you're willing to count on that, fine, he'll be FANTASTIC. I, on the other hand, would prefer to have a back who can actually make something happen if he gets hit.

Posted by: Michael Procton | Oct 6, 2008 8:20:28 PM

Hey Proc, we could have your lover Foster back. When he got in the open backfied he would take his knee and knock the ball out of his own arm.............


By the way how is your friends doing? Foster, Carter and Colbert...........


Posted by: jay | Oct 6, 2008 8:33:35 PM

Hey Procton,

I seen DeAngelo make plenty of contact with his 123 yards rushing on 20 carries against the Chiefs. he broke numerous tackles and if you were honest enough you would admit so yourself. This was a game where the carries were just about evenly split with DeAngelo getting 20 carries and Stewart getting 19 carries with both backs receiving close to an even split in both halfs of the game. Out of Stewart's 19 carries 10 were in the first half and 9 were in the second half. Even though the carries were pretty much evenly split DeAngelo averaged 6.2 yards a carry while Stewart averaged 3.8 yards a carry. To try and state DeAngelo isn't a starting caliber back, what does this say about Stewart then when DeAngelo did so much better. Or are you going to try and state something ignorant like DeAngelo had better blocking when both their carries were split and spread out throughout the game. There's no honest excuses you could make for this outcome so just be big enough and admit you were wrong about DeAngelo.

Posted by: Reno | Oct 6, 2008 8:40:07 PM

So Procton would rather not have a back that can get into the inzone 3 times and get 123 yards in a single game. This shows that Procton knows nothing about football.

Posted by: Revshawn | Oct 6, 2008 9:02:33 PM


whatever, man.

Posted by: beavis | Oct 6, 2008 9:10:59 PM


it's called an endzone not inzone. You are starting to scare me. Are you Keeping it Real's (aka SYPRIS) little brother or second cousin? LMAO. And you typed that with a quote "you know nothing about football" lmao

Posted by: 1stepcloser2kir | Oct 6, 2008 9:15:54 PM

Who cares?

Posted by: Revshawn | Oct 6, 2008 9:35:35 PM

procton, seriously have you ever laced up a pair of cleats to be such an expert.

Posted by: JD | Oct 6, 2008 10:28:51 PM

"DeAngelo's game was nowhere NEAR as good as his numbers indicated." - Michael Procton

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Those silly facts and statistics are deceitful, huh?

Posted by: Justin | Oct 6, 2008 11:41:25 PM

1stepcloser2kir --- Don't be such a typical webcam queen. That monkey-see, monkey-do character flaw is for toddlers... or didn't anone ever let you in on that?

Charles Chandler--- great grad analysis (hard to find discrepencies after a game like that), but why did you leave out Brayton's game-changing sack/forced fumble that he produced early on? ...especially if you're going to mention everyone else.

Posted by: Keeping It Real | Oct 7, 2008 3:25:24 AM

Charles--- I just saw that you addressed that in "Key Moments." My bad.

You made a great point about the "killer instinct" this week. Keep it rollin' Panthers!! Back to back wins, baby! Back to back!!!

Posted by: Keeping It Real | Oct 7, 2008 5:14:50 AM

looks like Charles Johnson is comming about. did anyone notice on his sack the qb fumbled. he could a had a hat trick if he saw it. still games like this make me happy about getting game pass.
the dude who hit trent edwards was a an instant replay of JP's hit on Ryan, except for the flag.

Posted by: Gut | Oct 7, 2008 5:22:53 AM

If the Bucs game were played tomorrow, the OL depth chart would be:

LT- Frank Omiyale
LG- Travelle Wharton
C- Geoff Hangartner
RG- Kedrick Vincent
RT- Jeremy Bridges
**with the 6th lineman being M. Ber... & and Jeff King the 7th guy in an emergency.

If the diagnosis to Kalil keeps him out this week and the other two OL can't come back in time either, what are the chances that the Panthers will elevate or sign someone?

Posted by: Keeping It Real | Oct 7, 2008 5:28:52 AM

Here's another one...
If Kalil is OK to come back this week, but Gross isn't, do they move Wharton out to LT and plug in Hangartner at LG, or do they keep Omiyale out there to face off against the Bucs' defense?

Posted by: Keeping It Real | Oct 7, 2008 5:37:07 AM

They keep Omiyale at LT, Wharton at LG, and either Kalil or Hangartner at C. I suspect Otah may be back on the field for the Bucs game, though. So Bridges may be the backup RT.

Posted by: NSpicer | Oct 7, 2008 7:01:10 AM

As for Deangelo Williams, he's a keeper and a performer. He's been the little guy RB his whole career, including college. But he's always performed. There's a reason his numbers were so high in college. And although the NFL plays at a different speed, he's doing fine. And he's a big part of Carolina's success.

I also don't ascribe to the theory that all of Deangelo's numbers came courtesy of no talent of his own and just great blocking from his linemen. He broke tackles way past the line of scrimmage on his own. He flat outran the secondary. He showed moves to make guys miss and take poor angles on trying to tackle him. And, yes, his linemen did a good job as well.

But I've said it before and I'll say it again...this is a team sport. It's not an individual RB that broke off 123 yards and 2 TDs in the running game. And it's not just the linemen who were responsible for it either. The whole thing has to work together for it to happen. And the same goes for Jonathan Stewart or any other RB in the NFL when they get the ball.

Is he an every down back? Probably not. He could be, but I'm pleased with the platoon approach the Panthers have going with him and Jonathan Stewart. Deangelo has the speed to break off huge runs and take it to the house. Stewart can do that, too, but he's a better bruising-style, short yardage guy right now for us. No one expects Deangelo to bowl over people. That's not his style of running. But together, Williams and Stewart are a great combination to have...and in my opinion, better even than the Stephen Davis and Deshaun Foster thunder-and-lightning we had in 2003.

Just my two-cents,

Posted by: NSpicer | Oct 7, 2008 7:11:50 AM

"Panthers reap benefit of staying with coach"...
Alright Charles!!! Great article! But are you sure the coast is clear to print such a politically dangerous story?

If I may, I'd also like to include Cowher to that list of coaches who were in the hotseat before having great success. Ironically, the experts were screaming for him to come out of retirement and take Fox's place.

Now that the team is on a winning streak, everything is peachy. But what happens if the Panthers lose back to back games? Are the "fans" going to start calling for heads to roll again?? This franchise just may be a victim of too much success too soon (in terms of the fan support and their expectations).

Speaking of which, it was awesome to hear the crowd in the stands get involved the way they did again. Go Panther fans!!!

Posted by: Keeping It Real | Oct 7, 2008 8:27:18 AM

who really cares how DeAngelo gets his yards and how he gets into the endzone. I remember two occasions where he showed some power. One was a 3rd and about 5 and he hit the LBs about a yard short and drove them to the first down marker, another time was when he stiffarmed a defender to the ground and gained a couple more yards.

The audacity of some people to critique every run this guy has, its pathetic.

Go Peps, too, the man is back, his numbers may not quite bear it out yet, but they will come.

Posted by: matt | Oct 7, 2008 8:35:04 AM

KIR, look in the upper left hand corner of the page. There's a link to email Charles Chandler directly to tell him what you think about all of his articles.

MP, if a running back isn't good if his OL opens up giant holes for him to run through, then does that mean that Emmitt Smith was not a good rb?

Posted by: annoyed by this | Oct 7, 2008 8:52:08 AM


Well said, I couldn't agree with you more. Even if somehow the blocking was better on D Will's carries he still has to hit the hole, make the cuts and correct decisions. Did you see how fast he hit the hole on that run up the middle for his 3rd TD of the half, WOW.

I honestly think everyone should just ignore Procton's comments and see if he just goes away b/c it is nearly impossible to take him seriously.

Posted by: Mason | Oct 7, 2008 9:14:30 AM

yeah, at least he can get past that second level of the defense, unlike Foster. Is he a bruiser that will picku up the 3rd and 2's or will he wear down a 'd' for 4 quarters? No. but no one ever said he was so that is irrelevant. His job is to hit the holes and make defenders miss and so far this season, he has done a great job at it. That is all that matters, anyone who tries to argue that DeAngelo isnt doing his job is simply arguing for the sake or arguing or just for attention.

Posted by: matt | Oct 7, 2008 9:34:27 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.