Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Details of Devin White's illness

This topic contains 21 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  VirgilCaine Sep. 12, 2019 at 5:55 pm.

Viewing 7 posts - 16 through 22 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1210483

    Bootz2004
    Participant

    Criticism is often just “analysis person x doesn’t like”.

    If Devin was this ill and that was causal for his ineffectiveness (the exact same types of ineffectiveness that I covered in my breakdown of his play at LSU which gave me pause in projecting him, and exactly what we saw in the preseason) then he should NOT have been playing. It isn’t heroic to compromise your defense because you’re compromised. And it’s not good coaching to put a player in position where he has to voluntarily “tap out.” White is NOT the kind of guy who is going to beg out of a game so this is on the coaches.

    For the sake of White and the sake of the team, LVD should have played the Middle and Bucannon the Moe.

    You could’ve stopped at the 1st sentence.

    +2
    -2
    Rating: 0. From 4 votes.
    Please wait...

    #1210488

    Nobody
    Participant

    This is me being person x and not liking your criticism.

    +1
    -4
    Rating: -3. From 5 votes.
    Please wait...
    #1210489

    NotDeadYet
    Participant

    Leaders lead by example. I suspect he told Bowles he could play, so if he showed in practice that he could, why not play on game day?

    +2
    0
    Rating: +2. From 2 votes.
    Please wait...
    #1210492

    Nobody
    Participant

    Leaders lead by example. I suspect he told Bowles he could play, so if he showed in practice that he could, why not play on game day?

    That’s perfectly fine.

    But if the working post-hoc premise has become: “He was incapable of being effective because of his ailments”, which it appears to be, then he shouldn’t have played.

    If it’s not…then why are we having this conversation?

    +1
    0
    Rating: +1. From 1 vote.
    Please wait...
    #1210502

    Bootz2004
    Participant

    This is me being person x and not liking your criticism.

    Aye aye person X

    +2
    -3
    Rating: -1. From 5 votes.
    Please wait...
    #1210564

    Culo Con Dientes
    Participant

    He should not have played. It is one thing to feel better walking around and another thing to play a 3 hr football game in 90 degree temps.

    +2
    -1
    Rating: +1. From 3 votes.
    Please wait...
    #1210567

    VirgilCaine
    Participant

    Leaders lead by example. I suspect he told Bowles he could play, so if he showed in practice that he could, why not play on game day?

    That’s perfectly fine.

    But if the working post-hoc premise has become: “He was incapable of being effective because of his ailments”, which it appears to be, then he shouldn’t have played.

    If it’s not…then why are we having this conversation?

    If the description is accurate he was substantially impaired and should not have played. That does not automatically translate to him being substantially better when healthy but you would certainly expect improvement

    The truth is problem somewhere in between but he’s not leading to play when substantially impaired

    +1
    0
    Rating: +1. From 1 vote.
    Please wait...
Viewing 7 posts - 16 through 22 (of 22 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.