John Ross “healthy scratch” right? He posted this.

[*SHRacerX*]

(12-18-2017, 11:01 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Maybe by playing a guy like Lafell over a guy like Ross we send a message that players will earn their playing time based on their productivity, not because they are younger and/or were drafted higher.  We want to establish a winning culture here where coaches hold players accountable, but we also want to see guys like John Ross put on the field over more productive players.

All Ross had to do to get on the field was look better than Brandon Lafell, and he didn't.  So in summation, the value of playing a guy like Lafell over guys like Core, Ross, and Malone is that it should, in theory, send a message to the young guys...something that I'd assume a winner of a HC would want to do.

I'm not Lafell's cousin or anything, but if it's stupid to play him because he's over 30 then we shouldn't have picked him up in the first place.  We should have gone into 2016 with Green and then some sort of amalgamation of Erickson, Kumerow, Wright, Boyd and Core.  Quit getting old washed-up WRs off the scrap-heap if they're going to outplay our young guys.

You lost me at this statement.  Lafell was productive with AJ Green on the other side of the field and Joe Mixon in the backfield?   No, he wasn't.  Look at his targets vs receptions and he hardly ever got separation in one on one coverage.  People love to kill Dalton for holding the ball too long and then scrambling, but he hardly ever had someone with clear separation.  I counted ONE contested pass for Case Keenum yesterday.  One.  That is not what Dalton got to see when he dropped back in to coverage.  

As far as earning the spot goes, how can you demonstrate superiority in non-contact practices?  Ross should have been getting way more opportunities than he did as should Core and Malone.  I think our next coach will show you that the best play, and the rest sit.  At least I hope that is what happens.