03-10-2021, 05:38 PM
(03-10-2021, 04:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What you conveniently ignore was he had the same HC and DC in 2020 that he did in 2019. Now if his play would have dropped off in 2019 then you'd have a rare point. Perhaps...now I'm just spitballing here...he lost playing time in 2020 because his last 4 games he had 3 tackles, 1, sack, and 1 QB hit
You like to point out what he did with good coaching by pointing to his last 8 games with Seattle. His last 8 games in 2019 with thise crappy coaches he had 8 sacks, 41 tackles, 16 QB hits.
Despite his excellent play in 2019 the crappy defensive coaches wanted to get rid of him. When they didn't get what they wanted they started cutting his playing time in 2020. Despite no other player on the roster outperforming Dunlap he only played a total of 79 snaps his last three games with the Bengals.
Here is how brilliant his coaches were. Week 3 he had 9 SOLO tackles, a QB hit, a TFL and a tipped pass. So what happened the next week? His playing time gets REDUCED.
(03-10-2021, 04:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If you consider winning being a bad employee, losing $4Mil, and getting fired by your new employee then, like a great many things, we disagree
Dunlap got what he wanted. He lost $2.6 million (not 4), but it was not about money with him. Like I pointed out before the Bengals were not taking any of his money when he was arguing with the coaches on the sidelines. Instead they were embarrassing him by only playing him 15 snaps a game when the players in front of him were scrubs. Plus he knew he had no chance of winning with those clowns in charge.
I find it hilarious they way so many people act like they would just bend over and take it from an incompetent boss. Somehow they think being stupid means being "a good employee". The fans who sit on their asse watching the games are allowed to complain all they want about how stupid the coaches are, but if a player whose reputation is on the line because of stupid coaches tries to do what is in his own best interest the fans turn on him.
