My partner on this blog seemed to be watching a different game than I was. I'll admit, the stands of FedEx field provide a very different perspective on the game, but is he kidding about Smoot?? For those of you that know me, you know that when he was here the first time, Fred Smoot was my favorite player on the team. This time around, however, he just flat out CANNOT COVER!!
Fred Smoot is supposed to be a cover corner, much like Champ Bailey. Now, of course, he's no Champ, but he was definitely a solid cover corner in this league during his first stint as a Skin, and cover corners are hard to find. Now, I don't know if it was the Party Boat or what, but he just cannot cover anymore. This is why the Vikings benched him last year, and this is why they were happy to see him go when the Redskins signed him.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am happy he is back, but he was brought back to be a nickel corner, not a starter, and on Sunday, he showed why. He spent almost the entire game chasing Chris Chambers, among others, all over the field, consistently lagging a step behind. I'm surprised that no one go the hose to put him out because he was getting torched by the Dolphin receivers the entire game.
He had exactly ONE good play the whole game, and even then he couldn't close the deal. Yes, had he caught that interception at the end of the game, he would have definitely gone house, and all of his previous poor play would have been forgotten...but he dropped it. Nice job Smoot.
The guy's a has-been...So, can someone please tell me why they benched Shawn Springs for him? I have some theories, but I will wait to hear my partner's rebuttal before I start with the conspiracy theories.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
they benched Springs for him because he doesn't do much good to them hurt. i think they'd rather have him play sporadically than get hurt and not have him at all. maybe, i dunno. i'm not a coach.
What? That's the stupidest thing ever, and if they're doing that, then they are the worst coaches ever. I've heard this argument over the course of the week, and I think it's bogus. Basically what you're saying is that the coaches would rather lose a game to a lesser team so they can save their best CB for a bigger game. I know they won, but they easily could have lost that game, and the win was despite Fred Smoot and Carlos Rogers getting torched ALL DAY LONG!
I think that theory is BS and just don't make any sense. You're right, he doesn't do much for them hurt, but he does the exact same amount of nothing on the bench!
End Rant.
maybe it doesn't make any sense, but its not BS, its the only thing i can come up with that will satisfy your "Springs is better than everyone else" theory.
if you want to know what I think, its that Springs is not a better corner than those other guys, he's just as much of a liability. but you think he's better, so what other reason would there be if he's the best option? that they WANT to lose games, or that they don't want to get him hurt. its not an argument, i'm just trying to answer the question. if I was a coach, and he was indeed better, he'd be on the field, so don't call me stupid. i'm not the one benching him.
i mean, what other answers are there? maybe they're looking to trade him, and they know they're going with Rogers and Smoot, so they might as well get them on the field to learn what they have to learn and do what they have to do? i dunno...
I'm not calling you stupid...I've heard that argument several times already. I just think that argument makes no sense...
I mean, when has Springs NOT been the #1 corner? Sure, he was hurt, but it's widely accepted that he was the best corner we had on the team. And, especially based on Sunday's performance by Rogers and Smoot, he's definitely better than those guys.
If Springs wasn't the best guy, they'd have announced Smoot as a starter much sooner than game time. Hell, Springs didn't even know until like an hour before game time. Gibbs said he was hurt, then Springs said he didn't know what Gibbs was talking about.
Sounds real shady to me! Didn't they do this same thing with LaVar?
yeah, i think something like this did happen with Arrington. and it was the dumbest thing ever.
so, since that "argument" (which i've already said isn't an argument, but whatever) makes no sense, what other ideas are there? i guess they don't think he's the number one guy. that, or they're trying to trade him. or maybe they are repeating the whole LaVar debacle where they want to "amp him up" for when he does play, which in my mind is stupider than the injury idea.
it really isn't that frustrating to me. in the end, Springs isn't gonna play much either way. so you can give the other guys some play time and hope it helps them learn, meanwhile you can also have a healthy Springs to trade away. other than that, i just don't know what it could be. it makes no sense, but there's no other explanation. or is there? oh ya, the redskins LOVE losing. so much so that they go out of there way to keep arguably good player off of the field (it happened with Arrington). come to think of it, maybe that is the real reason!
Post a Comment