Posts: 38,906
Threads: 921
Reputation:
132441
Joined: May 2015
(03-10-2021, 10:12 AM)fredtoast Wrote: He lost playing time because of poor coaching. Despite how well he produced in 2019 the defensive coaches still wanted to get rid of him.
Winning coaches who know what they are doing don't have any problems with Dunlap.
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.
As you've been shown, the coaching didn't change,the player did
(03-10-2021, 10:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Instead of just drawing a check for a losing team with losing coaches.
And he WON by proving he was right and they were wrong. Money was never the issue for Los. The Bengals were not taking any of his money when he was yelling at the coaches on the side lines.
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
Posts: 3,425
Threads: 238
Reputation:
14204
Joined: Oct 2016
The fact of the matter is Dunlap will be on his 3rd team in less than a year. He had all.the natural ability to be dominant year in
Year out. But he never had the motor say of a JJ Watt or even James Harrison.
Did he say he had thoughts of retiring after the Bengals traded him?
He may not have the desire to play anymore....who knows?
Maybe he ends up in Arizona as a situational pass rusher.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(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.
Posts: 38,906
Threads: 921
Reputation:
132441
Joined: May 2015
(03-10-2021, 05:38 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 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.
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.
In week 11 Carlos played 76% of the Seahawk's snaps (his highest for them of the year) He has 2 sacks, 3 QB hits and 4 tackles, the next week he played 54% of their snaps. The 2 games you point to where the Bengals are "stupid" Dunlap's snap count went from 82% to 75%; while Carl Lawson's went from 52% to 65%. In that Philly game you point to Carlos had 0 sacks and 1 QB hit, while Lawson had 2 sacks, 2 QB hits, 1 TFL, and 1 FF. Now what kind of idiot coaching staff would try to get Lawson on the field more?
Dunlap got what he asked for, not what he wanted; unless you think he wanted Seattle to rob him of millions and then fire him...I find some things hilarious too.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(03-10-2021, 06:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The 2 games you point to where the Bengals are "stupid" Dunlap's snap count went from 82% to 75%; while Carl Lawson's went from 52% to 65%. In that Philly game you point to Carlos had 0 sacks and 1 QB hit, while Lawson had 2 sacks, 2 QB hits, 1 TFL, and 1 FF. Now what kind of idiot coaching staff would try to get Lawson on the field more?
Snaps going to Lawson were not the problem. After Dunlap's monster game against the Eagles his playing time decreased while the percentage of snaps for DEs Kareem and Akinmoladun almost DOUBLED from 16% to 30%.
I know some people can't understand anything other than drawing a check and hanging on their boss's nutsack no matter what. But a lot of NFL players have pride. They would rather give up some pay in exchange for a chance to possibly win a championship and show how stupid their prior coach was for playing scrubs in front of them.
Posts: 38,906
Threads: 921
Reputation:
132441
Joined: May 2015
(03-10-2021, 06:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Snaps going to Lawson were not the problem. After Dunlap's monster game against the Eagles his playing time decreased while the percentage of snaps for DEs Kareem and Akinmoladun almost DOUBLED from 16% to 30%.
I know some people can't understand anything other than drawing a check and hanging on their boss's nutsack no matter what. But a lot of NFL players have pride. They would rather give up some pay in exchange for a chance to possibly win a championship and show how stupid their prior coach was for playing scrubs in front of them.
There comes a time when I just realize you're trolling and we've gotten there. Seattle coaches are brilliant because they reduced Carlos' snaps by 22% after a good game; yet the Bengal coaches are stupid by reducing Dunlap's snaps by 7% after a 0 sack outing while increasing the snaps of a younger player by 13% who sacked the QB twice and forced a fumble.
I can understand plenty and I understand I'll keep up with my chess game, while you try to figure out checkers.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
(03-10-2021, 07:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Seattle coaches are brilliant because they reduced Carlos' snaps by 22% after a good game;
Dunlap left that Seattle/Philly game with a foot injury. That is why his number of snaps dropped.
There was no injury issue when Dunlap saw his playing time cut against Jacksonville by the Bengal coaches. Instead they just had to double the percent of snaps played by a couple of scrubs.
(03-10-2021, 07:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I can understand plenty and I understand I'll keep up with my chess game, while you try to figure out checkers.
Checkmate.
Posts: 38,906
Threads: 921
Reputation:
132441
Joined: May 2015
(03-10-2021, 08:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Dunlap left that Seattle/Philly game with a foot injury. That is why his number of snaps dropped.
There was no injury issue when Dunlap saw his playing time cut against Jacksonville by the Bengal coaches. Instead they just had to double the percent of snaps played by a couple of scrubs.
Checkmate.
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/dec/01/seahawks-notes-whats-the-latest-on-carlos-dunlaps-/
Quote:Dunlap played 38 of 71 possible snaps against the Eagles before departing.
53%
Go back to your checkers
Posts: 16,932
Threads: 418
Reputation:
96782
Joined: May 2015
Ah Heeeeeck No! You burned that bridge buddy.
Posts: 16,932
Threads: 418
Reputation:
96782
Joined: May 2015
(03-08-2021, 04:22 PM)pally Wrote:
So what does being grateful to the Seahawks have to do with his house in Cincinnati? He's just yet taking another shot with the whole "reduced price" BS.
|
