running backs

[Patler]

He was noticeably limping after the first couple carries. It was a pre-existing injury. Lacy has a history of foot and ankle issues. You continue to act like what happened to Lacy vs Dallas occurred in a vacuum. The staff rolled the dice, had their fingers crossed, held their breath.....and we know the rest. Agree to disagree

I never said it occurred in a vacuum. Probably half the team is nursing an injury of some sort. You can't adjust and compensate for everything. If a RB is cleared to play, the coaches should assume he can be asked to carry the ball, be targeted for passes, and block when required. Lacy wasn't asked to do anything other than that. It's not up to the coach to second guess the medical staff.

Of course they took a chance, just like they did with Cobb, Adams, Bakhtiari and others last year. Just like Rodgers two years ago. Matthews countless times. Lacy other times, too. Lang now. Bulaga many times. Randall this year. Sitton for several years. There was nothing uniquely special about Lacy's situation. In fact, it was almost routine. They had a plan for how to proceed without him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Of course they took a chance, just like they did with Cobb, Adams, Bakhtiari and others last year.

Not the same thing. A running back, especially a biggin, trying to play on a bad ankle is a very bad bet.

I think yetisnowman thoroughly demolished you in this argument. But that is only because I thoroughly agreed with him to begin with. We call that confirmation bias.

[Patler]

Not the same thing. A running back, especially a biggin, trying to play on a bad ankle is a very bad bet.

I think yetisnowman thoroughly demolished you in this argument. But that is only because I thoroughly agreed with him to begin with. We call that confirmation bias.

So TT and MM are now supposed to make the medical determinations, too? That's ridiculous. What were they supposed to do in your mind, not play Lacy even though he was cleared to play?

You guys are second guessing now based on what happened after the fact.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Ya, hindsight is the pleasure of the fan. I had a bad feeling about Lacy during the game. I would have sat Lacy or any back with a suspect ankle. But especially Lacy, as he is a critical resource to be protected for the season. "Cleared to play" is just the start of the coach's decision, not the final word, IMO.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I agree with Harlan purely because I'm in a bad mood.

[red]

yes, IMO a coach should be able to make that basic kind of medical determination

player is hurt and can make it worse, maybe don't risk him for a couple weeks

LIKE THEY DO WITH EVERY OTHER MINOR FUCKING BUMP OR SCRAPE ON THIS TEAM

how many months have we seen other guys held out because of ankle issues in the past? but not the fattest one out of the group, he says he's good to go, you you let him go

and when he starts limping like crazy out of the gate, clearly hurt, you just leave him in

in horse racing, as soon as a jockey feels any little thing wrong with the horse, he pulls it up to prevent the horse from doing more damage. and the horse would do more damage because its stupid and only knows one thing, to run. maybe fat mike should have prevented his horse from destroying himself and the season

he doesn't call the plays (thats a-rod doing his own thing), he doesn't do anything at practice but stand and watch (zook runs practice and the other coaches yell and make corrections), he can't game plan or make adjustments, if he can't look out for the players, then what the hell is the point of M3?

[red]

Ya, hindsight is the pleasure of the fan. I had a bad feeling about Lacy during the game. I would have sat Lacy or any back with a suspect ankle. But especially Lacy, as he is a critical resource to be protected for the season. "Cleared to play" is just the start of the coach's decision, not the final word, IMO.

i agree with this 100%

just because you can, doesn't mean you should

[pbmax]

i agree with this 100%

just because you can, doesn't mean you should

So which two are you cutting to sign two running backs a week earlier?

[red]

easy, janis and barclay and shouldn't be on this team

at the time we had 7 wr's i think, we only ever use 3. and janis doesn't get it

[Patler]

They would need a 75 man roster to do what some of you want.

If the coaches are going to second guess the medical staff, maybe the docs should make up the game plan.

[pbmax]

easy, janis and barclay and shouldn't be on this team

at the time we had 7 wr's i think, we only ever use 3. and janis doesn't get it

And today would you put Knile Davis at WR?

[red]

And today would you put Knile Davis at WR?

yes, because you need more then 5 wr's

[red]

They would need a 75 man roster to do what some of you want.

If the coaches are going to second guess the medical staff, maybe the docs should make up the game plan.

at least someone would be making game plans

[Harlan Huckleby]

And today would you put Knile Davis at WR?

They did split KD wide on some plays. Odd.

[gbgary]

knile davis released.

[VegasPackFan]

Knile Davis released. Don't understand this move at all.

[Pugger]

Knile Davis released. Don't understand this move at all.

Evidently with Ty coming back and Starks getting close they didn't think this guy was any better than what we already have. Now that Banjo has been released we have 2 open roster spots. I wonder how these will be filled...

[red]

the packers would have owed the chiefs a draft pick if he was on the roster for 3 games

because they cut him after 2, we owe the chiefs nothing

of course, nothing is what this leaves us at RB even if starks is getting healthy

[red]

Evidently with Ty coming back and Starks getting close they didn't think this guy was any better than what we already have. Now that Banjo has been released we have 2 open roster spots. I wonder how these will be filled...

gotta be with more wide recievers

we might go into next week with only 7 on the active roster.

the horror

[gbgary]

again...since we can only bring back one from ir why would it be starks?