Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal
JoeRedskin, I find it interesting you still put all the blame on Lloyd. Before he comes to DC he's a productive player. When he leaves DC he's a productive player. Is the issue Lloyd or DC? I'm willing to bet DC. He may be a douchebag, I hear lots of players are douchebags. Unfortunately, it's part of the sport.
Fact is -- you need to get on the field to make plays. He rarely was on the field, and even rarer was he targeted for a pass. I'm not shocked that never seeing the field makes someone upset. Especially when they sign a large contract and expecting to get play time.
Regardless of the reason -- Lloyd didn't get a chance here and I think we missed out on a talented guy.
|
Your opinion is noted and respected, but I think it's misleading to say he was "productive." When he was in SF, he was the most targeted player on a dreadful offense, and caught roughly one third of balls thrown his way. That's pretty convincingly terrible.
I agree that Lloyd is off to his most productive start of his career this year, and Chicago's offense may actually benefit from having a receiver that doesn't get separation, but will catch the ball anyway. Of course, for a majority of offenses, that leads to unnecessary interception risk.
For Gibbs, that meant he couldn't play. I know you'll put that one on Gibbs, but for pretty much all coaches, that means he can't play.
And if Lloyd is willing to play hard for Ron Turner and Ron Turner is willing to put his last life as an NFL coordinator on Brandon Lloyd as a starting WR, more power to them both.
But he's just not very good, and even if the Bears can manage to salvage something out of his career, they probably could have been more productive if they used their efforts on a more promising talent, IMO.