Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
As is certainly your prerogative.
But do you really believe they froze him out? I think coaches have some serious egos to them, but I don't think so poorly of them that I truly believe they were icing Charles for the sake of assuaging their own egos.
There is nothing to be gained by sitting him, especially not when they showed they would use him repeatedly early in the game (to great success no less).
If you don't like the injury explanation, what explanation do you like?
When you hear hoofprints, don't go looking for zebras. The conspiracy angles are pretty damn farfetched. Meanwhile, Charles stopped getting the rock after he put his head down and tried to lay out a tackler. Immediately afterward he was laying on the sideline for a spell, never to return to heavy usage.
Occam's razor speaks quite loudly here, IMO.
|
Dude, he didn't sit. That's the thing.
You're telling me was was too injured to get the ball - while getting it 3 times, including on the most important play of the game to that point - but he was OK enough to be used EIGHT times in pass protection, picking up the blitz 3 times and fanning once?
If he was hurt, as Haley has implied, he shouldn't have been on the field. He certainly shouldn't have been used in pass protection.
But he was on the field. Quite a bit, in fact.
We just quit using him for anything productive.