The Pierre Garcon problem

[Caliskinsfan]

This looks like a fishing reference and I fish. But I'll be damned if I understand this post.

Sty is 'fishing' for debate and discussion.

The 'worm' is the use of Garçon for a discussion that is really about Ross.

That said, Jay did indeed say that Ross only knew Garçon's position.

I'd add that both Jay and Ross BOTH said that Ross was making some mental errors on routes in practice that he needed to clean up.

 

[JonBlaze]

Then it's the Ross problem. Stupid thread title

 

[skinsdad62]

sty hates garcon's salary and feels he isnt a number 1 wr . sty also feels that preseason flash ross is somehow the answer to our deep game despite any attempt at him looking at the facts as to why he isnt playing

there excuses to him he doesnt get that perhaps he didnt want to bust his young wr in public so he went the garcon route instead

fact is garcon knows the other position and could move there if needed however ross hasnt shown he can step into the role but ross according to sty should be entitled to the position because he is a track star on the field whether he lines up wrong or not

 

[skinsdad62]

maybe this thread should have been called the jackson problem . he is getting paid very well and it looks like we will be lucky to have him vs the pats , if that ?

 

[Stymietee]

sty hates garcon's salary and feels he isnt a number 1 wr . sty also feels that preseason flash ross is somehow the answer to our deep game despite any attempt at him looking at the facts as to why he isnt playing

there excuses to him he doesnt get that perhaps he didnt want to bust his young wr in public so he went the garcon route instead

fact is garcon knows the other position and could move there if needed however ross hasnt shown he can step into the role but ross according to sty should be entitled to the position because he is a track star on the field whether he lines up wrong or not

Actually, it looks like you're buying Gruden's BS, and that's what it is. He says that he lines up wrong or doesn't know the plays, then he says that the guy must step up in Jackson's absence, but what he does is more telling. Let's say that he's right and Ross is playing the same position as Garcon, hell, I'll even give you his reliance on Ross' s inability to line up properly. So the reveal is......where's the guy playing the Jackson position and the deep ball that comes with that? What Gruden has done so far is not utilize that guy but instead mostly thrown to...........you guessed it........ Rashard Ross when there is a deep ball. I say take his ass out of the game and never let him see another snap until he learns that the team doesn't need the only deep production he's given them in Jackson's stead.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Actually, it looks like you're buying Gruden's BS, and that's what it is. He says that he lines up wrong or doesn't know the plays, then he says that the guy must step up in Jackson's absence, but what he does is more telling. Let's say that he's right and Ross is playing the same position as Garcon, hell, I'll even give you his reliance on Ross' s inability to line up properly. So the reveal is......where's the guy playing the Jackson position and the deep ball that comes with that? What Gruden has done so far is not utilize that guy but instead mostly thrown to...........you guessed it........ Rashard Ross when there is a deep ball. I say take his ass out of the game and never let him see another snap until he learns that the team doesn't need the only deep production he's given them in Jackson's stead.

Still trying to figure out how Garcon figures into all your theories.

 

[Stymietee]

Still trying to figure out how Garcon figures into all your theories.

You're giving me too much credit.......and it's not my theroy. J. Gruden gets the credit for making it "The" Garcon problem when he stated that the reason Ross is not playing more is because Ross and Garcon plays the same position. Goes like this:

Questioner: coach why aren't we seeing the deep ball more

Coach: well we have a guy who can go deep, but we can't use him because we value the guy in front of him
More

Questioner: but coach, utilizing the deep ball more helps your offense in both the running game and on
those short to midrange routes.

Coach: What would you have me do, bench Pierre?

 

[j_y19]

You're giving me too much credit.......and it's not my theroy. J. Gruden gets the credit for making it "The" Garcon problem when he stated that the reason Ross is not playing more is because Ross and Garcon plays the same position. Goes like this:

Questioner: coach why aren't we seeing the deep ball more

Coach: well we have a guy who can go deep, but we can't use him because we value the guy in front of him
More

Questioner: but coach, utilizing the deep ball more helps your offense in both the running game and on
those short to midrange routes.

Coach: What would you have me do, bench Pierre?

Ok. So how is that a garçon problem?

 

[Stymietee]

Ok. So how is that a garçon problem?

It's a problem for coach Gruden, he said it, and evidently cannot figure out a way to solve it.

 

[Stymietee]

Does anyone here get the distinction between "THE" and "A" in relation to the title???

 

[skinsdad62]

i dont see it as BS stymie when i look at the film breakdowns and see what the coach is saying

is it BS when he drops the ball on TV vs the jets

and how about grant , year one he wasnt used much either

 

[Stymietee]

i dont see it as BS stymie when i look at the film breakdowns and see what the coach is saying

is it BS when he drops the ball on TV vs the jets

and how about grant , year one he wasnt used much either

Good for you and I support your right to see it that way. There is no right way or wrong way for either of us to see things related to the topic. One way looks at the negative and the risk that goes with that, while the other looks at the positives and the gains that goes with that. Specifically, two P.I.'s and a deep completion vs. a dropped ball and the occasional improper line-up mishap.

The job of the HC and his team is to first select the guys that fills the roster and gives your team its best chance at success. Another part is to prepare your guys to be ready in the event of injury. Well, here we are.

 

[skinsdad62]

Good for you and I support your right to see it that way. There is no right way or wrong way for either of us to see things related to the topic. One way looks at the negative and the risk that goes with that, while the other looks at the positives and the gains that goes with that. Specifically, two P.I.'s and a deep completion vs. a dropped ball and the occasional improper line-up mishap.

The job of the HC and his team is to first select the guys that fills the roster and gives your team its best chance at success. Another part is to prepare your guys to be ready in the event of injury. Well, here we are.

again we are talking about the 5th wr on the roster . a guy who hasnt beaten out garcon , crowder , grant or jackson . coaches dont sit guys that can help them win sty. gruden doesnt benefit by keeping a "weapon " on the bench when his career is literally in the balance

sorry it doesnt pass the common sense test . roberts got benched for non performance . if ross can play the position at the level he needs to he would be in there

 

[Stymietee]

again we are talking about the 5th wr on the roster . a guy who hasnt beaten out garcon , crowder , grant or jackson . coaches dont sit guys that can help them win sty. gruden doesnt benefit by keeping a "weapon " on the bench when his career is literally in the balance

sorry it doesnt pass the common sense test . roberts got benched for non performance . if ross can play the position at the level he needs to he would be in there

Utter nonsense!!!! He made the team, and this is important, produced more than he hindered when called upon. That old model of acquiring guys that need season after season to develop no longer works under SM. Get used to it. What doesn't pass the common sense test is a coach who has a need, a player who as previously stated has produced more than he's hindered but said coach cannot seem to put the two together. While I agree with you that coaches don't sit guys that help them win, implicit in that thought is that they perfectly utilize all of the talent on their rosters.........so far from the truth.

 

[skinsdad62]

Utter nonsense!!!! He made the team, and this is important, produced more than he hindered when called upon. That old model of acquiring guys that need season after season to develop no longer works under SM. Get used to it. What doesn't pass the common sense test is a coach who has a need, a player who as previously stated has produced more than he's hindered but said coach cannot seem to put the two together. While I agree with you that coaches don't sit guys that help them win, implicit in that thought is that they perfectly utilize all of the talent on their rosters.........so far from the truth.

again coaches dont sit guys who can help them sty sorry it doesnt pass the common sense test . gruden needs all the play makers he can get because he is looking at the unemployment line and if ross could handle it at this point and i mean at this point he would be playing

 

[skinsdad62]

read this stymie . his position coach lays out why he isnt playing .

i dont know what else to give you its there in black and white from his position coach

 

[Stymietee]

read this stymie . his position coach lays out why he isnt playing .

i dont know what else to give you its there in black and white from his position coach

Did you listen to the Ike Hilliard interview (his position coach) ? In it coach said it directly, when asked why Ross is not getting more playing time, he said, quote:" because we have 3 guys that we have a lot of money tied into...uh with you know Pierre and Andre and Desean" He then went on and talked about (their) youth as if young was an added addendum to support the the money statement.

 

[skinsdad62]

i think the above quote sty says that