(12-12-2018, 06:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Except not one single team in the league benches a guy for a guy who looks worse in practice.

And maybe Westerman just does not look that good in games either.  Fans seem to pick a favorite player then they always think that player looks good even we he is not doing anything special.

I wasn’t talking about Westerman specifically, but more in a general aspect that a coach making a decision to stay with a player that practices well, but stinks it up in a game, is a losing strategy.

I understand that practice is important, but it can’t be more important than winning.

(12-11-2018, 10:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Didn't Westerman miss the block on the extra point attempt?

Yes, and they don't include those plays in the PFF grades. 

(12-12-2018, 12:45 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Terrible philosophy if being good in practice, but bad in games gets you more playing time and bad in practice, but good in games, gets you less playing time.

Basically saying it’s more important to be a good practice team than 

?? Never said that at all, just show me where the bengals have not played players that have consistently outperformed other players. And you logic is backwards, if you dont practice well you tend to play less for a variety of reasons

(12-12-2018, 07:29 PM)McC Wrote: Not to mention, how can you tell in a non contact practice how a lineman is performing?  The fact that he performs well every time he plays should speak for itself.

Not at RG

(12-11-2018, 10:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Didn't Westerman miss the block on the extra point attempt?

Didn't we throw away 2 points not going for the extra points and trying two point conversions something we have not succeeded in since 2015. That was most likely Marvins call.

(12-12-2018, 09:13 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: I wasn’t talking about Westerman specifically, but more in a general aspect that a coach making a decision to stay with a player that practices well, but stinks it up in a game, is a losing strategy.

I understand that practice is important, but it can’t be more important than winning.

They seem to put a massive emphasis on practice. They want their players to go hard all the time, not just "slack off" except for game time because practice is important too. I can understand it, but it feels so high school or college.

(12-13-2018, 01:00 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Not at RG

Has Westerman seen any game snaps at RG? I don't recall him ever being out there at that spot.

(12-13-2018, 12:56 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: ?? Never said that at all, just show me where the bengals have not played players that have consistently outperformed other players. And you logic is backwards, if you dont practice well you tend to play less for a variety of reasons

That was in response to any coach knowing his players and knowing that he is putting an inferior player in games. It could be what is going on with Westerman and Marv, we don't know because we can't read Marv's mind. But, if any coach is knowingly doing this, they will lose.

 It's not about practicing "hard", every player should do that or be off the team, trying hard doesn't automatically make you good. It's about how they look/perform in practice vs. game. Some guys just have a switch when it's game time. That gets the adrenaline flowing like practice can't.

(12-13-2018, 10:49 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Has Westerman seen any game snaps at RG? I don't recall him ever being out there at that spot.

a few in preseason and I thought a few last year but if he was not moved to RG much it would be safe to assume he did not show the ability to play RG in drills, practice, meetings well enough to beat out either Hopkins or Redmond or maybe his desire was not there to do it, 

(12-13-2018, 11:11 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: That was in response to any coach knowing his players and knowing that he is putting an inferior player in games. It could be what is going on with Westerman and Marv, we don't know because we can't read Marv's mind. But, if any coach is knowingly doing this, they will lose.

 It's not about practicing "hard", every player should do that or be off the team, trying hard doesn't automatically make you good. It's about how they look/perform in practice vs. game. Some guys just have a switch when it's game time. That gets the adrenaline flowing like practice can't.

Apples to Oranges ... he was not playing LG because Boling is our LG, but when they moved Boling to tackle, he actually now is getting reps.. if Marv disliked him he would not be getting the shot .  I think we also forget we have very little clue what goes on outside of game tape.. that have great affects on a player .

(12-12-2018, 06:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is not what Profootballreference.com said.

They have Mixon with 16 carries for 92 yards up the middle, and only 1 carry for 5 yards behind the LG.  And even then I don't know which LG because Westerman only played 63% of the snaps.

What is the source for your numbers?

Not to hijack the Westerman thread, but does that stat indicate that Billy Price is starting to settle in as a solid run blocker?

(12-13-2018, 04:46 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Apples to Oranges ... he was not playing LG because Boling is our LG, but when they moved Boling to tackle, he actually now is getting reps.. if Marv disliked him he would not be getting the shot .  I think we also forget we have very little clue what goes on outside of game tape.. that have great affects on a player .

I don't know that Marv hates anyone, but maybe they're misjudging their talent.  You may be right about the L vs R thing, because if he hated Westerman, he could have played Hopkins at LG.....unless I missed Trey on the injury report.  If he was on there, then they had no other option at LG.

(12-13-2018, 04:46 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Apples to Oranges ... he was not playing LG because Boling is our LG, but when they moved Boling to tackle, he actually now is getting reps.. if Marv disliked him he would not be getting the shot .  I think we also forget we have very little clue what goes on outside of game tape.. that have great affects on a player .

I was not talking about Westerman and Marv specifically. I’m talking in general terms about a hypothetical coach that knowingly plays players that are worse in games just because he likes how they practice. That’s the terrible philosophy I was referring to, not what is actually going on in Cincy, because we just don’t know.

Could that be the situation here? Sure, but who knows since we can’t read Marv’s Mind and he hasn’t straight up said the reason why Westerman isn’t playing over Redmond. Hobson’s article on Westerman’s run blocking suggested Marv wanted to continue rotating Hopkins in at LG, but Polllack has to step in and “recommend” that Westerman has earned the playing time.

If Marvin wanted you in the draft, you're golden. If not, you got a problem.

(12-13-2018, 07:17 PM)McC Wrote: If Marvin wanted you in the draft, you're golden.  If not, you got a problem.

So tell me how you know which players Marvin wanted and which ones he didn't.

This should be good.

I know this is going to sound crazy and totally impossible, but maybe, just maybe, over the course of two seasons with two different O-line coaches evaluating both his in-game performance and his practice field performance have decided that Westerman is just not that great.


No, that couldn't be it. Instead it has to be multiple coaches that just want to play inferior players to play worse and make them as coaches look worse. Yeah, That's it. That's the ticket.

(12-13-2018, 08:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I know this is going to sound crazy and totally impossible, but maybe, just maybe, over the course of two seasons with two different O-line coaches evaluating both his in-game performance and his practice field performance have decided that Westerman is just not that great.


No, that couldn't be it.  Instead it has to be multiple coaches that just want to play inferior players to play worse and make them as coaches look worse.  Yeah, That's it.  That's the ticket.

He was sick and underweight at the start of the season is most likely why Pollack didn't start him. Westerman is only 305 pounds when healthy so he would be like 290 or less that's unheard of in my world for an Olineman.

Westerman has looked rather good overall every game he’s played in his career thus far. All have been at LG.
Here’s my question though...if the coaches think LG and RG are the same (we’ve heard Marvin say this), wouldn’t it be safe to assume Westerman would do rather well at RG?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(12-13-2018, 08:23 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: He was sick and underweight at the start of the season is most likely why Pollack didn't start him. Westerman is only 305 pounds when healthy so he would be like 290 or less that's unheard of in my world for an Olineman.

Which is similar to why we ended up not playing Evan Mathis.

Who knows what goes on behind the scene??   All I can say is that except for one notable play against San Diego everyone universally says he played a great game.

I'll take that and hope that becomes the norm for him and he becomes a starter at one of the interior line positions - hopefully right guard.

(12-13-2018, 08:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I know this is going to sound crazy and totally impossible, but maybe, just maybe, over the course of two seasons with two different O-line coaches evaluating both his in-game performance and his practice field performance have decided that Westerman is just not that great.


No, that couldn't be it.  Instead it has to be multiple coaches that just want to play inferior players to play worse and make them as coaches look worse.  Yeah, That's it.  That's the ticket.

Could additions:  Players can and do improve so maybe he did start improving and gets more playing time.  I actually think there is a simple two reasons why he has not gotten as much playing time.  

1. Boling:  He is the start at LG and Westerman did not show enough to start a domino of moves to play somewhere else than LG
2. Westerman just has not cut it at RG so he is for sure stuck behind Boling unless injuries like what we have now at LT which gave him a chance at LG