Start 'em Sit 'em rest of season

[Tru11]

Not to mention a lot of players are playing for their film to get other shots with other teams. 

 

dont forget the coaches lol.

 

pees basically said brooks is messing up in practice more then lewis and its why lewis is playing.

 

if he is a guy on the hot seat i dont see why he would risk playing the lesser guy and lower his value if things dont pan out.

 

same goes for the position coaches.

dont think hewitt is going to bang on the table to let brooks play only to risk for it to back fire and people going to question his ability to develop players even more.

[52liveforever]

Its a business.

players need to earn their snaps.

not get them handed.

players will have from jan till like june to get healthy and gear up for a new season.

most take a short break anyways and will be training real to get ready.

really no point in sitting them and telling them to take a rest cause they wont.

at least those with the will to make the best out of their career.

Exactly! It's a business. If I have nothing to lose and have an opportunity to assess lower end assets for possible greater reward than the higher end assets than what I am utilizing at the moment why wouldn't I?

It doesn't hurt my higher end assets. They will still be there next season to utilize if the lower end doesn't produce anything.

Risk vs Reward. There is no risk, but possible reward so how is that not a business decision.

[52liveforever]

dont forget the coaches lol.

pees basically said brooks is messing up in practice more then lewis and its why lewis is playing.

if he is a guy on the hot seat i dont see why he would risk playing the lesser guy and lower his value if things dont pan out.

same goes for the position coaches.

dont think hewitt is going to bang on the table to let brooks play only to risk for it to back fire and people going to question his ability to develop players even more.

This is the best counter I have gotten. Bravo. You make very valid points which is what I'm looking for. The only thing I can say to that is sometimes guys perform better in the spot light.

Really though that's hard to argue with so with that I'll say if younger guys aren't looking totally liable give them some extra chances. Obviously guy like Arthur Brown haven't gained any confidence, but if guys aren't totally losses I feel we should use the rest of the season as an extra preseason for some guys.

[Tru11]

Exactly! It's a business. If I have nothing to lose and have an opportunity to assess lower end assets for possible greater reward than the higher end assets than what I am utilizing at the moment why wouldn't I?

It doesn't hurt my higher end assets. They will still be there next season to utilize if the lower end doesn't produce anything.

Risk vs Reward. There is no risk, but possible reward so how is that not a business decision.

 

it does send a signal though.

doing just that will tell everyone we are tanking lol.

 

if harbough does this aint nobody ever is going to buy his speeches every again.

his msg about not quitting and fighting till the end and such becomes a joke.

 

you keep yourself credible by putting the best players you have on the field.

 

also for the players it will make them look real soft and other teams and such rather stay away from guys who dont play when they can.

 

flacco staying on the field is what people want to see.

they respect and admire that and its what people strive for.

 

if he ran off and say fk it , people would have understood but nobody would compliment it.

 

This is the best counter I have gotten. Bravo. You make very valid points which is what I'm looking for. The only thing I can say to that is sometimes guys perform better in the spot light.

Really though that's hard to argue with so with that I'll say if younger guys aren't looking totally liable give them some extra chances. Obviously guy like Arthur Brown haven't gained any confidence, but if guys aren't totally losses I feel we should use the rest of the season as an extra preseason for some guys.

 

what i said above goes for this as well.

 

TBH i think you forget a lot of these guys have a lot of pride and ego.

 

treating these game like its pre season is most likely not going to sit well with a lot of players/coaches/FO and probably even the owner.

 

maybe its the former athlete in my but i really cant phantom people going into a game with winning not being the #1 priority.

a coach could not sell it to me he was trying to win if he decided to play worse players for evaluation lol.

 

it really is the easiest way to loose the trust of the players and loose the locker room.

 

you get players playing for their money rather for the team/win.

[52liveforever]

it does send a signal though.

doing just that will tell everyone we are tanking lol.

if harbough does this aint nobody ever is going to buy his speeches every again.

his msg about not quitting and fighting till the end and such becomes a joke.

you keep yourself credible by putting the best players you have on the field.

also for the players it will make them look real soft and other teams and such rather stay away from guys who dont play when they can.

flacco staying on the field is what people want to see.

they respect and admire that and its what people strive for.

if he ran off and say fk it , people would have understood but nobody would compliment it.

what i said above goes for this as well.

TBH i think you forget a lot of these guys have a lot of pride and ego.

treating these game like its pre season is most likely not going to sit well with a lot of players/coaches/FO and probably even the owner.

maybe its the former athlete in my but i really cant phantom people going into a game with winning not being the #1 priority.

a coach could not sell it to me he was trying to win if he decided to play worse players for evaluation lol.

it really is the easiest way to loose the trust of the players and loose the locker room.

you get players playing for their money rather for the team/win.

you say the athlete in you is part of your reasoning. It's the same for me, but for different reasoning. I struggled with major knee injuries and never gave myself enough time to get 100%. I always got on the field/mat as soon as I could because of the competitor in me. Those are decisions I regret because it hurt me more than anything. Doctors always cleared me, but I was never ready. That's where I come from.

Point: Competitors aren't capable of making rational decisions and Doctors really don't know or care as much as you'd like.

Edited December 8, 2015 by 52liveforever

[usmccharles]

you say the athlete in you is part of your reasoning. It's the same for me, but for different reasoning. I struggled with major knee injuries and never gave myself enough time to get 100%. I always got on the field/mat as soon as I could because of the competitor in me. Those are decisions I regret because it hurt me more than anything. Doctors always cleared me, but I was never ready. That's where I come from.

Point: Competitors aren't capable of making rational decisions and Doctors really don't know or care as much as you'd like.

I think you guys are looking at it differently.  His premise is, correct me if im wrong Tru, is that he (like myself) will always want to win, not giving up, ie quiting because thats how I and he, and a lot of people take what your suggesting.  And i think i gather your saying that you were never able to get healthy so could never play at your potential which is understandable, but there will always be injuries.  You cant "not play" for the fear of getting hurt, obviously. 

 

Im with Tru, theres just no good from doing any of this imo, because that is the definition of tanking. 

 

In your original post you suggested sitting Maxx Williams iirc...that would be a huge mistake considering how young he is and needs all the time he can get playing. 

[rmcjacket23]

When did I say bench all the healthy players? All I was saying is give them some more playing time and a chance to maybe show what they can do out on the field.

You can't do one without doing the other... its literally impossible. If you're giving a young guy more playing time over a veteran guy who hasn't done anything to earn less snaps, then you are, by definition, benching a guy who didn't deserve it. Whether its a permanent benching or a partial benching is irrelevant. In either scenario, you are walking up to a veteran player who's played well and saying to them "you've done nothing wrong, but you're going to play less because we want to see if the guy who you already beat out for this job is better than you".

 

If we are talking about replacing veteran players who won't be here next year or aren't playing well with young guys, I'm all for it. But we are already doing that for the most part, so nothing changes.

[Tru11]

you say the athlete in you is part of your reasoning. It's the same for me, but for different reasoning. I struggled with major knee injuries and never gave myself enough time to get 100%. I always got on the field/mat as soon as I could because of the competitor in me. Those are decisions I regret because it hurt me more than anything. Doctors always cleared me, but I was never ready. That's where I come from.

Point: Competitors aren't capable of making rational decisions and Doctors really don't know or care as much as you'd like.

 

yeah but you cant tell a competitor to sit down when the doctors told him he can play.

you should know that better then anyone.

 

a coach can decide to make that decision but its really not going to sit well with the player and probably aint going to sit well with his teammates either

 

you also cant say to the other competitors who are healthy that you don't care about winning so you will giving players who have not earned it a chance to show what they can do.

 

not trying to be rude or take this the wrong way but if playing that game is the difference between a starter next season or being cut , chances are you will play with every risk and no regret.

heck if you playing is the difference between a 1 year vet min and a 3 year 10 mil , its probably the easiest decision to make.

 

maxx for instance right now has the chance with Boyle suspended and Gilmore injured to go out and show what he can do and solidify his place as the first TE next season.

its also a great way to get alot of experience.

 

if he decides to quit on the season and one of the unknown TEs comes up and lights the world on fire , maxx might go for being the leader as the starting TE next season  to fighting with now 3 other guys for 3 spots on the team.

 

nothing is guaranteed and he also need to take every chance he can get to show what he can do.

 

otherwise he can end up like arthur brown where the team decides to get a rookie TE or sign a Vet cause he did not take advantage of the opportunity to show what he got.

[rmcjacket23]

That's actually not at all what I meant. I'm saying let some of these guys get to 100% for the offseason. KO for example. He has had surgeries in the past couple offseasons and spent his offseason recovering from surgery rather than getting stronger and staying in good physical shape. It has hindered players like him come regular season.

 

No one in the league is 100% right now, but I think certain players would benefit from taking extra time. What good does having KO play the rest of the season? Maxx needs to bulk up some. His body just isn't ready for this level yet. We know he is going to be a good player. Why not let him get healthy and get him started on a program while the team still has access to him before he heads into the offseason?

 

I'm not saying I'm right or you're wrong because who are we to know. We have two differing opinions and that is fine, but you haven't offered much into how it is more beneficial to keep playing some of these guys other than to bash my opinion without much to say about it. 

Well, KO is a bad example for your argument, because he's about to be a FA. He literally gains nothing by sitting, because he's essentially auditioning for 32 teams in the league right now for a fat contract. Literally the worst possible scenario for him right now is to NOT be playing.

 

Sitting a guy to "bulk up" when he can be getting valuable playing time (which is Maxx's real problem) in an offense that is complex and requires constant repetition to excel in doesn't make sense. He's got at least six full months starting one from month from now to bulk up... that's the perfect time to be doing that. December is NOT that perfect time. December is the time where he should be working on the skills sets that he needs to be successful in this league, such as route running, blocking, understanding play selection, hand usage, etc., which are all things he's struggled with. That's what he should be working on now, and doing that at home isn't happening.

 

This isn't complicated. If somebodies injured, you wait until they get back healthy, and you play them. Having them sit around for weeks while they are completely healthy literally benefits nobody. It doesn't benefit the player, it doesn't benefit the team. Guys needing "extra rest" have five full months of it on the horizon. If that's not enough time, chances are the 2-3 weeks you spent playing in December wasn't the difference maker.

[rmcjacket23]

Exactly! It's a business. If I have nothing to lose and have an opportunity to assess lower end assets for possible greater reward than the higher end assets than what I am utilizing at the moment why wouldn't I?

It doesn't hurt my higher end assets. They will still be there next season to utilize if the lower end doesn't produce anything.

Risk vs Reward. There is no risk, but possible reward so how is that not a business decision.

And there's the problem... there IS a risk. The risk is you telling a veteran to not play so you can get a look at somebody who's trying to replace him.

 

How do you think the veteran feels about that? In particular, a veteran who maybe is in a contract year, or a veteran that you'd like to resign but have no alienated because you benched him solely to look at replacing him?

 

We're not talking about benching a guy who you know you will cut or not resign. We're talking about benching players who you fully anticipate being back in a major role the following season. Think maybe that player may not be too happy with you benching him eyed solely towards replacing him?

 

How about if the guy you played over him turns out to be a pretty awful player? You got a look at a young guy, he sucks (most likely outcome), and you pissed off the veteran who you sat to see if the young guy could play? If I were a veteran with leverage in that spot (and there's several on the team that qualify here), I'd treat it... like a business. I'd lobby for more money, threaten a holdout, etc.

 

After all, if its a business, that business just proved to me as a veteran that I'm worth more, since now you know you have no replacement for me on that team, despite trying to do so.

 

Think maybe that's a risk? I'd say so. There's a time and a place to play these kinds of evaluation games, and doing it with players that you expect to retain in feature roles isn't one of them. I'd argue the risk actually exceeds the reward in that regard, which is why you rarely see teams do this to players they plan on keeping.

[balfan23]

You can't put players on the field to just see what will happen. They have to earn their way onto the field. You can't bench players who are capable of playing (whether or not they are banged up), when they have earned their right to be on the field. 

 

Do you think the players we'd bench would be cool with this approach? Not a chance. They don't want rest ... they want to play. If they've earned that and you deny them of it, that's not going to work out well. 

 

The most important aspect of surviving a season like this is maintaining some level of harmony. You start approaching the game this way, you run the risk of meltdown.

[rmcjacket23]

You can't put players on the field to just see what will happen. They have to earn their way onto the field. You can't bench players who are capable of playing (whether or not they are banged up), when they have earned their right to be on the field. 

 

Do you think the players we'd bench would be cool with this approach? Not a chance. They don't want rest ... they want to play. If they've earned that and you deny them of it, that's not going to work out well. 

 

The most important aspect of surviving a season like this is maintaining some level of harmony. You start approaching the game this way, you run the risk of meltdown.

What a radical concept... you mean the NFL isn't a charity where we just GIVE players chances without actually earning them?

[balfan23]

What a radical concept... you mean the NFL isn't a charity where we just GIVE players chances without actually earning them?

And as we've both commented, the most potentially damaging side of this is benching players who have earned their time on the field. 

 

I understand the sentiment of this thread ... it is just not practical IMO and it has the potential to create some negative and lasting side-effects. 

[rmcjacket23]

Well, I'll go ahead and put it out there then...

 

Who, precisely (I'm asking for names) are the guys that we should be benching/significantly reducing playing time in order to see young guys play? Who are the young guys who should see more playing time because of this and why have they earned that playing time?

 

I have a feeling a lot of the players that will be listed are already having this happen to them, in which case we aren't really discussing anything futuristic. 

[Filmstudy]

That draft kills me. Elam, Brown, Simon who got cut

 

They got 3 bad players with a 1, 2, and 4.  That's bad, but I'd encourage folks not to be selective about it.  They also drafted the best nose tackle in the game (from a small school) in the 3rd round, a good fullback in round 4, and a quality RT in round 5.

 

Right now the 2012 draft looks worse and  Upshaw and Osemele are both about to depart.

[Militant X 1]

And there's the problem... there IS a risk. The risk is you telling a veteran to not play so you can get a look at somebody who's trying to replace him.

 

How do you think the veteran feels about that? In particular, a veteran who maybe is in a contract year, or a veteran that you'd like to resign but have no alienated because you benched him solely to look at replacing him?

 

We're not talking about benching a guy who you know you will cut or not resign. We're talking about benching players who you fully anticipate being back in a major role the following season. Think maybe that player may not be too happy with you benching him eyed solely towards replacing him?

 

How about if the guy you played over him turns out to be a pretty awful player? You got a look at a young guy, he sucks (most likely outcome), and you pissed off the veteran who you sat to see if the young guy could play? If I were a veteran with leverage in that spot (and there's several on the team that qualify here), I'd treat it... like a business. I'd lobby for more money, threaten a holdout, etc.

 

After all, if its a business, that business just proved to me as a veteran that I'm worth more, since now you know you have no replacement for me on that team, despite trying to do so.

 

Think maybe that's a risk? I'd say so. There's a time and a place to play these kinds of evaluation games, and doing it with players that you expect to retain in feature roles isn't one of them. I'd argue the risk actually exceeds the reward in that regard, which is why you rarely see teams do this to players they plan on keeping.

 

One of the major things that you don't do in "business" is to tip your hand too early cause if so, that could come back to bite you.  You may end up paying more when you could have have payed less.  That's what happens in these types of scenarios in the NFL as you mentioned.

[Filmstudy]

Well, I'll go ahead and put it out there then...

 

Who, precisely (I'm asking for names) are the guys that we should be benching/significantly reducing playing time in order to see young guys play? Who are the young guys who should see more playing time because of this and why have they earned that playing time?

 

I have a feeling a lot of the players that will be listed are already having this happen to them, in which case we aren't really discussing anything futuristic. 

 

Daryl Smith has been solid since he got here and played well against the Dolphins.  The same could be said about Canty.  however, neither player is likely to contribute to the next Ravens contender, so they would be good candidates to give up time to players like Orr, ABrown, Carl Davis, and KLM.

 

Something is systemically wrong with Tray Walker.  Either he can't learn the playbook, or he has terrible work habits, or he's behind in some significant way physically, because otherwise we would have seen him already.  The Ravens keep giving backup opportunities to Kyle Arrington.

 

Brooks should probably be starting, but there might be something wrong there as well.  The Ravens have been essentially unwilling to put him at free safety since the gaffe at New Orleans last season.  This continues even though the team has moved to taking Hill off the field on some 3rd downs because he isn't the coverage asset they hoped on the back end.

 

On offense literally everyone is getting a shot due to injuries.  Dan Brown is getting a significant shot.  Butler is playing well after what seems like a decade on the practice squad.  Kamar Aiken is the number 1!  Chris Givens was acquired for almost nothing and has been a legitimate separator.  Ross, Clay, and Mostert all were in-season pickups who have had offensive snaps.  Jensen and Hurst are getting opportunities they frankly don't deserve.  Terrence West was picked up off the scrap heap and will probably make the team next season.  Allen has provided much more than could reasonably have been hoped and looks like a real asset going forward.

 

Versus the Dolphins, Brooks, Trawick, Levine, ABrown, and Vaughn did not have any defensive snaps, but every single offensive player who dressed except Clausen played at least 1 snap of offense.  I think the "everyone is going to get a shot" mentality on offense has actually kept the team together and playing hard.

[spitfire418]

Daryl Smith has been solid since he got here and played well against the Dolphins.  The same could be said about Canty.  however, neither player is likely to contribute to the next Ravens contender, so they would be good candidates to give up time to players like Orr, ABrown, Carl Davis, and KLM.

 

Something is systemically wrong with Tray Walker.  Either he can't learn the playbook, or he has terrible work habits, or he's behind in some significant way physically, because otherwise we would have seen him already.  The Ravens keep giving backup opportunities to Kyle Arrington.

 

Brooks should probably be starting, but there might be something wrong there as well.  The Ravens have been essentially unwilling to put him at free safety since the gaffe at New Orleans last season.  This continues even though the team has moved to taking Hill off the field on some 3rd downs because he isn't the coverage asset they hoped on the back end.

 

On offense literally everyone is getting a shot due to injuries.  Dan Brown is getting a significant shot.  Butler is playing well after what seems like a decade on the practice squad.  Kamar Aiken is the number 1!  Chris Givens was acquired for almost nothing and has been a legitimate separator.  Ross, Clay, and Mostert all were in-season pickups who have had offensive snaps.  Jensen and Hurst are getting opportunities they frankly don't deserve.  Terrence West was picked up off the scrap heap and will probably make the team next season.  Allen has provided much more than could reasonably have been hoped and looks like a real asset going forward.

 

Versus the Dolphins, Brooks, Trawick, Levine, ABrown, and Vaughn did not have any defensive snaps, but every single offensive player who dressed except Clausen played at least 1 snap of offense.  I think the "everyone is going to get a shot" mentality on offense has actually kept the team together and playing hard.

If that's the reason they don't play Brooks then I'm baffled. He was actually in position on that play vs. NO and just didn't make a play on the ball. It was a rookie mistake and is easily fixable. The most likely reason that he isn't playing is because he has Kendrick Lewis above him, who the coaches love and probably want to evaluate more and see if he should stay next year (I don't think he should). Also, he's still learning the game and his position and injuries have held him back.

 

This is what annoys me. The young players on offense are always getting a shot (WR's, RB's, TE's, even OL) but it seems like the ones on defense hardly ever rotate into the game if ever. I understand that we have way more injuries on offense, but still...

Edited December 8, 2015 by spitfire418

[rmcjacket23]

Daryl Smith has been solid since he got here and played well against the Dolphins.  The same could be said about Canty.  however, neither player is likely to contribute to the next Ravens contender, so they would be good candidates to give up time to players like Orr, ABrown, Carl Davis, and KLM.

 

Something is systemically wrong with Tray Walker.  Either he can't learn the playbook, or he has terrible work habits, or he's behind in some significant way physically, because otherwise we would have seen him already.  The Ravens keep giving backup opportunities to Kyle Arrington.

 

Brooks should probably be starting, but there might be something wrong there as well.  The Ravens have been essentially unwilling to put him at free safety since the gaffe at New Orleans last season.  This continues even though the team has moved to taking Hill off the field on some 3rd downs because he isn't the coverage asset they hoped on the back end.

 

On offense literally everyone is getting a shot due to injuries.  Dan Brown is getting a significant shot.  Butler is playing well after what seems like a decade on the practice squad.  Kamar Aiken is the number 1!  Chris Givens was acquired for almost nothing and has been a legitimate separator.  Ross, Clay, and Mostert all were in-season pickups who have had offensive snaps.  Jensen and Hurst are getting opportunities they frankly don't deserve.  Terrence West was picked up off the scrap heap and will probably make the team next season.  Allen has provided much more than could reasonably have been hoped and looks like a real asset going forward.

 

Versus the Dolphins, Brooks, Trawick, Levine, ABrown, and Vaughn did not have any defensive snaps, but every single offensive player who dressed except Clausen played at least 1 snap of offense.  I think the "everyone is going to get a shot" mentality on offense has actually kept the team together and playing hard.

Right, so Daryl been losing significant snaps and so has Canty. So basically there's really one player to complain about... Brooks. He looks too raw to me, he's been injured a few times.

Other than that, I don't see who should be getting opportunities that isnt, so I don't even understand the topic to be honest.

[Cawtious]

Daryl Smith has been solid since he got here and played well against the Dolphins.  The same could be said about Canty.  however, neither player is likely to contribute to the next Ravens contender, so they would be good candidates to give up time to players like Orr, ABrown, Carl Davis, and KLM.

 

Something is systemically wrong with Tray Walker.  Either he can't learn the playbook, or he has terrible work habits, or he's behind in some significant way physically, because otherwise we would have seen him already.  The Ravens keep giving backup opportunities to Kyle Arrington.

 

Brooks should probably be starting, but there might be something wrong there as well.  The Ravens have been essentially unwilling to put him at free safety since the gaffe at New Orleans last season.  This continues even though the team has moved to taking Hill off the field on some 3rd downs because he isn't the coverage asset they hoped on the back end.

 

On offense literally everyone is getting a shot due to injuries.  Dan Brown is getting a significant shot.  Butler is playing well after what seems like a decade on the practice squad.  Kamar Aiken is the number 1!  Chris Givens was acquired for almost nothing and has been a legitimate separator.  Ross, Clay, and Mostert all were in-season pickups who have had offensive snaps.  Jensen and Hurst are getting opportunities they frankly don't deserve.  Terrence West was picked up off the scrap heap and will probably make the team next season.  Allen has provided much more than could reasonably have been hoped and looks like a real asset going forward.

 

Versus the Dolphins, Brooks, Trawick, Levine, ABrown, and Vaughn did not have any defensive snaps, but every single offensive player who dressed except Clausen played at least 1 snap of offense.  I think the "everyone is going to get a shot" mentality on offense has actually kept the team together and playing hard.

Curious as to why you feel that way about those two?

[52liveforever]

And there's the problem... there IS a risk. The risk is you telling a veteran to not play so you can get a look at somebody who's trying to replace him.

How do you think the veteran feels about that? In particular, a veteran who maybe is in a contract year, or a veteran that you'd like to resign but have no alienated because you benched him solely to look at replacing him?

We're not talking about benching a guy who you know you will cut or not resign. We're talking about benching players who you fully anticipate being back in a major role the following season. Think maybe that player may not be too happy with you benching him eyed solely towards replacing him?

How about if the guy you played over him turns out to be a pretty awful player? You got a look at a young guy, he sucks (most likely outcome), and you pissed off the veteran who you sat to see if the young guy could play? If I were a veteran with leverage in that spot (and there's several on the team that qualify here), I'd treat it... like a business. I'd lobby for more money, threaten a holdout, etc.

After all, if its a business, that business just proved to me as a veteran that I'm worth more, since now you know you have no replacement for me on that team, despite trying to do so.

Think maybe that's a risk? I'd say so. There's a time and a place to play these kinds of evaluation games, and doing it with players that you expect to retain in feature roles isn't one of them. I'd argue the risk actually exceeds the reward in that regard, which is why you rarely see teams do this to players they plan on keeping.

You make very valid points and you are probably right. I still feel as though some of these guys need to work on getting healthy, but I understand it's pretty impossible to get a competitor to understand that.

[52liveforever]

They got 3 bad players with a 1, 2, and 4. That's bad, but I'd encourage folks not to be selective about it. They also drafted the best nose tackle in the game (from a small school) in the 3rd round, a good fullback in round 4, and a quality RT in round 5.

Right now the 2012 draft looks worse and Upshaw and Osemele are both about to depart.

I thought Simon was a good pick. It was them cutting him that killed me. B-will and Juice save that draft.

And yeah you're right 2012 looks worse.

[52liveforever]

Looks like we are going with this concept