Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="RF2044, post: 1236147, member: 40"] That's a gross oversimplification. It isn't as easy for us to overcome the loss of an OL starter as it is for many other teams. Also, when the team is down one starter, they have to move a top reserve into the starting lineup, which can both degrade the level of play and further compromise subsequent depth if required to go deeper into the bench. Either situation impacts unit performance, despite what you're trying to pretend. Being down a starter is a HUGE impact, make no mistake. To say nothing of being down a starter in just about every game, multiple starters a few games, and multiple members of the rotation in most games. And in a few games where we did field the original starting five at the end of the year, our two best OL were both playing on one leg. Other than those issues, how'd you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln? And since we aren't in a great position from the standpoint of offensive line depth, we were sometimes forced to utilize a player like Lasker who was subpar, to the detriment of the entire unit's performance. Or play Palmer out of position. Or rush a kid onto the field who wasn't ready like Alex Hayes because we simply had no other options. It was worse in games where we were down 2 or 3 players from that 8 player rotation, and forced to cobble together weird lineups of players, where we had no depth, or where we were forced to play several players who were injured but available. Was the unit's subpar performance attributable to the position coach not having the chops to coach the position, or was it attributable to the cascade effect of injuries? As Kahneman suggests, when people have a difficult time conceptualizing complexity, they substitute easier questions that are easier to wrap their head's around [i.e., Adam isn't doing a good job]. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?