Hey everyone LBs getting severely limited opportunities and doing exactly what you expect and racking up stops at the LB position can't be called great. Don't do it or skeeter will call you a **** and say you can't comment if you didn't also see practice.
Bro, because we don't play the guys that are more pure LBs and also athletic and more talented with higher ceilings already. And we never were going to play Pruitt who was in the more hybrid S/Lb role... Why would anyone think Randle who is an elite athlete but has clearly not even shown at the HS level TOP pure LB success and would likely initially be also a pruitt-like safety/lb hybrid type player & or even as @DMoney suggest a total athlete who plays offense too... Would result in him developing quickly and actually be given reps?
Meltdown lol
We don’t play those guys because they aren’t better than what we have already. Not because we hate athletic and instinctual linebackers.
You think there is no possibility that Wiley/Pruitt/Bonner/Marcelin are better IN PAIR with one of Toure/Smith than having BOTH Toure and Smith on the field together for 90% of reps? Lmao. Ok.
Well to be technical we play JJ AS MUCH AS WE DO DUE TO INJURIES. However injuries or not since spring we already were going to carve out a significant role for him. That's just facts. There no excuse not to give reps to our youth especially when you consider the reprecussions towards next year's team as a direct result of these choices. Both of them are gone next year. So what then? Because we don't have a clue what we really have in the room if we won't even give them reps. Far as who's playing on the defensive side of the ball and who isn't MARIO has next to nothing to do with this. He simply supports his coaches decisions because that's what any coach who delegates authority properly should do. However he will certainly make an exception and decide to intervene when a player causes issues internally or off field. So we're seeing one exception this year. All things can be true. Heatherman can feel this is our best lineup, he can value athletic linebackers, this particular group might not be ready etc etc. But then you can't justify how many of the reps you give to dudes who don't match all of the established criteria for the position or who create defensive liabilities. You also then have to spread some reps around. Because your guys need reps,they need breaks,they need development etc etc.
I honestly don’t even understand your argument. Toure and Smith are playing really well. We should play those guys less because Wiley and Pruitt MIGHT be good?
Youre seeing half the picture. Each room has its own budget. It's a positional thing. So while big picture it's not a big allotment to the team, if your entire rooms allotment is say 5 mill(just an example. Not giving any figures out that reflect reality)for your group of linebackers yet your nil for this kid alone is 850k and it's a yearly contract in some instances a 2 year contract than look at what percentage of that allotment you gave to a kid who will have zero impact in his position group while he's on that contract. Let alone how that will make dudes in his group come back to us and have issues with their nil... Any worker knows what people around them are making. This is no different. If a kid who isn't even playing is making more than me but I'm actually contributing how you think I'm gonna take that.
I hear this argument and it makes sense but I disagree. We should always be willing to take home run swings on kids with unique athletic profiles, especially at a position that is so easy to find in the portal. Maybe Randle takes three years to develop into a freak. Maybe he doesn't develop at all. But I still think we should buy the occasional lottery ticket. He's not a Top 50 recruit based on how he fits with a college program right now. He just has a ceiling that others cannot reach.