Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Since 2005 the Bengals haven't had this on defense
#21
(05-30-2017, 01:47 PM)3wt Wrote: And I think there's a wisdom in this.   You don't want to toss a guy into the mix who's not totally ready.

And he's not the only coach that does this.  Belichick did the same thing with Brady riding the pine before Bledsoe got hurt.   I think it was clearly dawning on them that Brady was a prospect that was a lot better than they thought he would be.  But it took Bledsoe getting hurt for them to stick Brady in there.

Obviously the flip side of the coin is that you are squandering a superior talent you've not qualified while you make continue with a known commodity that is good but not great.

So it took an injury to get Burfict into the lineup despite his excellent pre-season performance.

Damned if you don't and you miss time with a potential pro bowl player;  damned if you do and you spoil a player before he's ready for prime time.

In the present case I think he'll get enough reps for Lawson and Willis to see if they show the potential to upgrade the pedestrian pass rush of an otherwise good quality player in Johnson.  If Willis shows both against the run and as a pass rusher he may get significant time.   I think Lawson will be a situational pass rusher while he trains at OLB.

Your flip side is kinda what I'm talking about. Obvious talent that is probably ready, but Marv makes them wait...seemingly out of respect to the incumbent vet. Burfict was ready. Atkins was a beast in his rookie preseason. Jeremy Hill looked like a beast early in his career, but had to wait on an injury to become starter. I wouldn't use Dunlap as an example, as he was playing plenty...just not "starting". 

Fwiw, I also think Brady is bad example because he wasn't drafted to actually take the job. Bledsoe was firmly entrenched as the franchise guy, while Brady was drafted in the 6th to probably compete for a backup spot. I get what you were saying though. But I just think we've had guys that could've made an impact initially, but they were just made to wait. This isn't super common, but it has happened.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Since 2005 the Bengals haven't had this on defense - Shake n Blake - 05-30-2017, 11:05 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)