Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tjmorgan
Exactly. Why do we not have packages in place just for Lavar. If he does not stay put in coverage, fine, don't use him in coverage. Put there are clearly times when we want to pressure the qb, and he is the best person on the team for that. He is a pure athlete, let him use those talents to beat his man. If he gets double teamed, then someone else has the chance of getting the qb. Third and long, bring the blitz. Lavar is the man for that down.
|
Williams essentially said that on the postgame, but there were no situations (specifically third and long) that fit the packages that Arrington was in on. Denver consistently had 3rd and 5 or 3rd and 8. Those are the exact situations where you need people to be in the right spots.. Let's assume he's in for as a pass rusher and he's supposed to take an inside charge and he thinks he reads something and goes outside to use his 'athletic ability' to beat his man to make a big play but the draw play goes right thru his gap for a first down or more. 3rd and 15, 3rd and 18 those plays don't happen. Those are the plays that kill a team..
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Southpaw
This is the dumbest comment I've ever heard about LaVar, and I'm not the least bit suprised it came from the mouth of Brian Mitchell. Someone please give me an example of a game that LaVar has lost for the Skins, because the only game I can remember LaVar being single handedly responsible for the outcome was the Carolina game a few years back when the Skins were 0-5 and looking at 0-6 and LaVar intercepted the ball and returned it for a touchdown. Winning the game, and basically single handedly turning the season around.
Everyone wants to discount the "conspiricy theories", but no one thinks that LaVar having a contract dispute recently and bad mouthing the medical staff in the offseason has anything to do with him not playing? Also, he can only void his final two years of his contract if he makes the Pro Bowl twice in the next two years, but hmmm... the three time pro bowler isn't playing good enough to start. I bet LaVar gets a lot more playing time around week 6 or 7, when he'll be unable to get the type of stats needed to make the Pro Bowl.
|
A couple of years ago, when George Edwards was def. coord, I don't remember the exact games, but there were about 3-4 of them that freelancing on defense cost us victories.. I can remember one specific play in the Carolina game that year where Trotter's freelancing resulted in a long TD pass to the back out of the backfield.. Look, I am a HUGE Lavar fan, but I also defer to the coaches knowing what's best for the team moreso than I do.. I think last year against Cleveland he got beat by coming up on Garcia (playing outside the scheme) and Aaron Shea got behind him for the winning TD.. That may have been M. Washington, I don't remember, but I know it was a loss because of that..
Let me just point out the major hole in the contract/keeping him out of the lineup logic regarding Lavar.. Nobody on the coaching staff wants to lose games. If you had a player that you think will significantly improve your chances of winning games you don't play him because of spite? The Redskins aren't hurting for money, it will seriously impact the cap to trade or release him in the offseason, so they aren't holding him out for financial reasons. Leaving him on the bench
hurts his trade value so there's no motivation there. I just don't get how the Redskins benefit from sabotaging their season for spite as has been suggested..