Did anyone else watch Comcast postgame? (Lavar Related)

[Stacks42]

It doesnt make any sense to have one of our best defensive players on the bench! When the run game wasnt working so well last year the skins tailored the blocking skemes to suit Portis, why dont they tailor something on D for Lavar? We cant get pressure from our lineman on D and for some reason GW stopped blitzing, maybe we do need someone who can go in there and wreak havoc. The fact that they are saying that LA doesnt fit into the scheme is just BS, he fit perfectly fine last year before he got hurt, he was the face of the Skins now he just an overpaid bench warmer. I say play your best players, and especially a player that you just re-negotiated a contract with and are paying large sums of money. Our D right now isnt an attacking D, it seems like we let things come at us rather than going up against an offense and punching them square in the mouth!

[tjmorgan]

Originally Posted by Stacks42

It doesnt make any sense to have one of our best defensive players on the bench! When the run game wasnt working so well last year the skins tailored the blocking skemes to suit Portis, why dont they tailor something on D for Lavar? We cant get pressure from our lineman on D and for some reason GW stopped blitzing, maybe we do need someone who can go in there and wreak havoc. The fact that they are saying that LA doesnt fit into the scheme is just BS, he fit perfectly fine last year before he got hurt, he was the face of the Skins now he just an overpaid bench warmer. I say play your best players, and especially a player that you just re-negotiated a contract with and are paying large sums of money. Our D right now isnt an attacking D, it seems like we let things come at us rather than going up against an offense and punching them square in the mouth!

Exactly. Why do we not have packages in place just for Lavar. If he does not stay put in coverage, fine, don't use him in coverage. Put there are clearly times when we want to pressure the qb, and he is the best person on the team for that. He is a pure athlete, let him use those talents to beat his man. If he gets double teamed, then someone else has the chance of getting the qb. Third and long, bring the blitz. Lavar is the man for that down.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by tjmorgan

Exactly. Why do we not have packages in place just for Lavar. If he does not stay put in coverage, fine, don't use him in coverage. Put there are clearly times when we want to pressure the qb, and he is the best person on the team for that. He is a pure athlete, let him use those talents to beat his man. If he gets double teamed, then someone else has the chance of getting the qb. Third and long, bring the blitz. Lavar is the man for that down.

Williams essentially said that on the postgame, but there were no situations (specifically third and long) that fit the packages that Arrington was in on. Denver consistently had 3rd and 5 or 3rd and 8. Those are the exact situations where you need people to be in the right spots.. Let's assume he's in for as a pass rusher and he's supposed to take an inside charge and he thinks he reads something and goes outside to use his 'athletic ability' to beat his man to make a big play but the draw play goes right thru his gap for a first down or more. 3rd and 15, 3rd and 18 those plays don't happen. Those are the plays that kill a team..

Originally Posted by Southpaw

This is the dumbest comment I've ever heard about LaVar, and I'm not the least bit suprised it came from the mouth of Brian Mitchell. Someone please give me an example of a game that LaVar has lost for the Skins, because the only game I can remember LaVar being single handedly responsible for the outcome was the Carolina game a few years back when the Skins were 0-5 and looking at 0-6 and LaVar intercepted the ball and returned it for a touchdown. Winning the game, and basically single handedly turning the season around.

Everyone wants to discount the "conspiricy theories", but no one thinks that LaVar having a contract dispute recently and bad mouthing the medical staff in the offseason has anything to do with him not playing? Also, he can only void his final two years of his contract if he makes the Pro Bowl twice in the next two years, but hmmm... the three time pro bowler isn't playing good enough to start. I bet LaVar gets a lot more playing time around week 6 or 7, when he'll be unable to get the type of stats needed to make the Pro Bowl.

A couple of years ago, when George Edwards was def. coord, I don't remember the exact games, but there were about 3-4 of them that freelancing on defense cost us victories.. I can remember one specific play in the Carolina game that year where Trotter's freelancing resulted in a long TD pass to the back out of the backfield.. Look, I am a HUGE Lavar fan, but I also defer to the coaches knowing what's best for the team moreso than I do.. I think last year against Cleveland he got beat by coming up on Garcia (playing outside the scheme) and Aaron Shea got behind him for the winning TD.. That may have been M. Washington, I don't remember, but I know it was a loss because of that..

Let me just point out the major hole in the contract/keeping him out of the lineup logic regarding Lavar.. Nobody on the coaching staff wants to lose games. If you had a player that you think will significantly improve your chances of winning games you don't play him because of spite? The Redskins aren't hurting for money, it will seriously impact the cap to trade or release him in the offseason, so they aren't holding him out for financial reasons. Leaving him on the bench hurts his trade value so there's no motivation there. I just don't get how the Redskins benefit from sabotaging their season for spite as has been suggested..

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Let me just point out the major hole in the contract/keeping him out of the lineup logic regarding Lavar.. Nobody on the coaching staff wants to lose games. If you had a player that you think will significantly improve your chances of winning games you don't play him because of spite? The Redskins aren't hurting for money, it will seriously impact the cap to trade or release him in the offseason, so they aren't holding him out for financial reasons. Leaving him on the bench hurts his trade value so there's no motivation there. I just don't get how the Redskins benefit from sabotaging their season for spite as has been suggested..

I love voices of reason.

Thank you.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I love voices of reason.

Thank you.

I just don't understand how that's not crystal clear to everyone. :frusty:

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I just don't understand how that's not crystal clear to everyone. :frusty:

It's not crystal clear to everyone because the numbers don't lie. All other starting linebackers have more than twice the tackles that Holdman has. Springs and even Carlos Rogers have more tackles than him. Walt Harris has one less than him and he's been injured for two games. What kind of linebacker has 2.5 tackles a game? And what's so good about being "in position" if your blocked on every play that comes your way?

All I'm saying is, opposing offenses fear Lavar. He's a disruptive force on the field and a playmaker. As I said before, if "freelancing" is the reason he's not on the field, why isn't Omar Stoutmire starting over Sean Taylor?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

if "freelancing" is the reason he's not on the field, why isn't Omar Stoutmire starting over Sean Taylor?

Maybe it comes down to that. Maybe the Redskins believe they can only afford to have one "freelancer" on defense and the coaching staff has decided that they'd rather it be Sean Taylor than LaVar.