I dunno. I'm not sure that Faniaka is/was any more able to do that as a veteran who played 3 games two years prior than a guy who clearly the Cards valued much more highly--valued much, much more than Andre Ellington.
As for the physical differences--didn't you just say in the prior paragraph that Watford has all the physical ability to compete at this level?
Bobbie Massie got benched for a guy who has been a five-year starter in the NFL. It's not really in the same league as not being able to nudge Paul Fanaika out of the way, is it?
The comment about the physical difference between levels was a generalization more than an excuse for Watford.
Re: Massie. It wasn't that Massie got beat out by a vet, it's that Massie showed so much inconsistency that the Cards SPENT 3 mil to bring in a vet who had been cut by two other teams in two years.
Re: Fanaika. The principle is this, the Cardinals value consistency over physical ability across the offensive line. That has been shown with trading Levi Brown to play Sowell, and signing Winston late to play instead of Massie. It isn't a stretch to believe that Fanaika got snaps because he was more consistent and made less mental mistakes than a rookie out of James Madison despite Watford's superior physical ability. It sums that up in the article.
Where you have hope is that this is a make or break year for Watford and he is verbalizing his understanding of this. The formula for success in the NFL tends to be talent + motivation + opportunity. In Watford's case, he has talent, he will get the opportunity and he says he is motivated. If I am reading tea leaves and picking a "sleeper" starter, I pick Watford because of these factors.
.
