- Joined
- May 8, 2014
- Messages
- 39,669
To begin with I think it is obvious that Foles was playing poorly. I don't think it is all him, however I concede that the change was necessary after how badly his play slipped in each of the last several games.
What does concern me is that the play of some other offensive players warranted accountability before they sat their leader. Cook is the obvious example of what I am talking about here but he is not alone. Others are guys like Britt, GRob, Mason, etc who have earned demotions. Whether or not there are guys behind them on the depth chart who can do the job certainly factors in, however I still think it should have been done.
With Cook the OC simply replaces him with Quick in the scheme, or goes with single TE and 3 wide or even back to an I formation backfield. Cook's bench time can be schemed around, no question in my mind.
GRob seemed to have nobody behind him who was an option once Roger went out, however they do have Battle who is likely not too much of a dropoff in pass pro. I understand why they kept GRob out there, as I also still have hope for the guy to be that LT we wanted at 2 overall. But after that last game if the guy does not play better I'd sit him immediately and give Battle a shot.
One might think that Mason has already felt a demotion, which is true. But if he cannot come in and spell Gurley in limited snaps without mistakes he does not deserve to be 2 on the depth chart. Promote Cunningham.
Britt did some good things in and around his disappearing acts, sure, but like Cook this is not a young WR on the upswing. He is a vet who has likely peaked. Quick should have had his snaps from day one IMO and should now.
That accountability has been missing on offense for too long, outside of Fisher's treatment of his QBs not named Bradford. For some reason his critical eye does not extend to that side of the ball. I'll say it yet again: if Cook was a LB he would have been demoted long ago. IMO now that the big chip has fallen with Foles maybe that will happen? Maybe we'll start seeing these garbage performances on offense cost players their starting opportunities.
What does concern me is that the play of some other offensive players warranted accountability before they sat their leader. Cook is the obvious example of what I am talking about here but he is not alone. Others are guys like Britt, GRob, Mason, etc who have earned demotions. Whether or not there are guys behind them on the depth chart who can do the job certainly factors in, however I still think it should have been done.
With Cook the OC simply replaces him with Quick in the scheme, or goes with single TE and 3 wide or even back to an I formation backfield. Cook's bench time can be schemed around, no question in my mind.
GRob seemed to have nobody behind him who was an option once Roger went out, however they do have Battle who is likely not too much of a dropoff in pass pro. I understand why they kept GRob out there, as I also still have hope for the guy to be that LT we wanted at 2 overall. But after that last game if the guy does not play better I'd sit him immediately and give Battle a shot.
One might think that Mason has already felt a demotion, which is true. But if he cannot come in and spell Gurley in limited snaps without mistakes he does not deserve to be 2 on the depth chart. Promote Cunningham.
Britt did some good things in and around his disappearing acts, sure, but like Cook this is not a young WR on the upswing. He is a vet who has likely peaked. Quick should have had his snaps from day one IMO and should now.
That accountability has been missing on offense for too long, outside of Fisher's treatment of his QBs not named Bradford. For some reason his critical eye does not extend to that side of the ball. I'll say it yet again: if Cook was a LB he would have been demoted long ago. IMO now that the big chip has fallen with Foles maybe that will happen? Maybe we'll start seeing these garbage performances on offense cost players their starting opportunities.
