How many pennies does it take...

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Other than the gratuitous last sentence. Agree.

I actually appreciate your pointing that out. I’m trying to cut back on the snark and sometimes don’t do a good job of it. I’ll try harder.

 

[Stout]

You can't just say "You don't know". If you're going to say there were mistakes you're going to have to show me mistakes.

None of which are evident in his statistics or PFF grade.

I don't have to show you bubkis. The burden here is on you, not me. You're the one claiming he didn't have flaws and citing only a PFF grade. You're going to have to show me directly why I should have faith he can completely turn it around this season. I've already agreed we have to start him; that's a given. Please tell me why I should feel confident about that.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

What now?

Simmons barely played as a rookie. The young linemen that have played didn't start. Fotu and Lawrence played 30% of snaps last year and less as rookies. Zach Allen played 144 snaps his rookie year.

There are only 2 rookies in recent history that played more than 50% of snaps I can recall.

Jalen Thompson. Even then he barely got a chance until game 10 as Swearinger took those snaps.

And Marco Wilson last year. Which you could argue was only because we gave Vance no option outside Alford and they surely didn't trust him to stay healthy in a full time roll.

You have ZERO evidence that there were errors in practice. In fact it's illogical to think that his errors increased as the season went on when he was playing 40%+ in the first 7 games.

Or do we think between playing 52% vs the Niners in Week 5 and 57% vs Texans in Week 7 that he suddenly started sucking in practice?

We do however have evidence that he trusts vets over rookies.

You have ZERO evidence that he didn’t make errors. And the best evidence to judge is playing time. Coaches play players they trust. They trust players that don’t make mistakes. It’s a reasonable assumption. Certainly more reasonable than “vance has an aversion to playing good players because they’re rookies” which is the leap you want us to make.

Also, playing rookies is playing rookies. Starting doesn’t matter. And most coaches don’t play rookies large minutes, and if they do it’s usually one, maybe two, at any given time. So the historical record of vance playing rookies doesn’t look much different than most coaches. And by seasons end of his rookie year Simmons was playing a lot. So the precedent for a rookie to gain Vance’s trust exists, it just didn’t apply to Collins . . . in fact the opposite occurred.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Wait, posters complain when something goes wrong?!? That’s crazy!


Btw, I still think Simmons is going to be an impact player. May eat crow in that, but I don’t think he’s as terrible as he’s made out to be on the board.

I agree. I think he had his ups and downs and that's to be expected from a guy who played so many different roles in college.

If I'm Kliff, I'm telling Vance you play the more talented guy who will make more mistakes but can make more plays too.

That's my biggest gripe with the coaching staff. Sometimes you have to accept mistakes with the understanding that young guys generally develop at least a little if not a lot.

 

[Jetstream Green]

Dude PFF is guessing just like you are. We’ve prettt firmly established that they don’t possess game plans, know individual assignments, etc either.

There’s no proof either way . . . other than the fact the coach didn’t trust him. That’s an obvious fact.

This, stats have some value but they really fall short for an accurate assessment due to these variables... and that is not even taking into consideration all the mistakes which he might have made in practice making the coaches hesitant to trust his ability on gameday

 

[BritCard]

I don't have to show you bubkis. The burden here is on you, not me. You're the one claiming he didn't have flaws and citing only a PFF grade. You're going to have to show me directly why I should have faith he can completely turn it around this season. I've already agreed we have to start him; that's a given. Please tell me why I should feel confident about that.

LOL there's nothing to turn around. There's no evidence on any issues. His tackling stats are good. His coverage grade is decent and better than Hicks. And his PFF grade was 70. He was the #16 pick and the 2nd linebacker taken in the draft with 6 awards in his last year in college.

That's everything in the positives column.

On the other side we have "Vance didn't start him over Hicks" and zero evidence of mistakes.

I feel comfortable with my position.

 

[BritCard]

This, stats have some value but they really fall short for an accurate assessment due to these variables... and that is not even taking into consideration all the mistakes which he might have made in practice making the coaches hesitant to trust his ability on gameday

Do you honestly think that his practice was good enough for him to play 40% of snaps in game 1, then be good enough to see his snaps increase to over 50% by week 7 and then suddenly and despite months of practice and 7 weeks of game time he took a sudden huge step backwards?

Does that make sense?

 

[Syracusecards]

You can't just say "You don't know". If you're going to say there were mistakes you're going to have to show me mistakes.

None of which are evident in his statistics or PFF grade.

Let me start by saying I’m excited to see what Collins can do.

That said, PFF grades for the Mike LB don’t give a full assessment. The Mike is responsible for getting the Defense in the right formations and adjusting on the fly if he sees something out if the ordinary. PFF isn’t grading Zaven poorly if he set the defense wrong and the DT missed a tackle because of it. See PFF’s definition of the Mike LB.

The MIKE linebacker is the field general for the defense. He has the toughest job of the 4-3 linebackers, because he needs to be able to cover the most ground, be it sideline to sideline, covering expanded gaps in a Wide-9 defensive front, or dropping into the deep middle in a Tampa 2. He also has the job, in most instances, of calling defensive signals and making sure everybody else is in the right place and on the same page.

Defensive Prototypes: Linebackers

www.pff.com

I’m guessing VJ was more concerned about the mental aspect of it than Zaven’s play.

There’s no way for anyone to know if Zaven was aligning the defense correctly or not. I guess we will find out this year. Hoping this kid can do it.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Do you honestly think that his practice was good enough for him to play 40% of snaps in game 1, then be good enough to see his snaps increase to over 50% by week 7 and then suddenly and despite months of practice and 7 weeks of game time he took a sudden huge step backwards?

Does that make sense?

I often agree with many of your posts, but I have to defer to the former ILB @Ouchie-Z-Clown and also with @Stout .

What you see with your eyes isn't always aligning with what was intended. Collins obviously wasn't playing because of the mental issues.

Think of the narrative like this: The Cardinals drafted Collins with the intention that he was going to play right away. Physically he is better than Hicks and the Cardinals thought he could grasp the defense immediately. Most expected that Hicks would either be traded or cut.

The leaks and news stories from the team changed during training camp however. More and more, Hicks was back in the plan. The team was saying we'd see all three LBs on the field.

Why did this change once they had an extended look? The only logically, reasonable explanation was that Collins wasn't ready to play assignment sound football.

Sure he looked better on tape, but only the Cardinals can understand what right looks like on any given play. Other observers can make educated guesses but they won't always be right.

As the GM, Keim has to do what he thinks is right for the team. Last year the team could afford to keep Hicks and sit Collins. This year the team can't. But they've hedged their bets a bit by bringing in Vigil. They still have Vallejo as well. That's smart GMing to a degree... you'd prefer not to, but while ILB isn't a glory position like it once was, but LB play can still sink a defense.

 

[elindholm]

I find that one penis is enough, but I suppose it depends on the woman. How many have you all tried?

 

[BritCard]

Let me start by saying I’m excited to see what Collins can do.

That said, PFF grades for the Mike LB don’t give a full assessment. The Mike is responsible for getting the Defense in the right formations and adjusting on the fly if he sees something out if the ordinary. PFF isn’t grading Zaven poorly if he set the defense wrong and the DT missed a tackle because of it. See PFF’s definition of the Mike LB.

The MIKE linebacker is the field general for the defense. He has the toughest job of the 4-3 linebackers, because he needs to be able to cover the most ground, be it sideline to sideline, covering expanded gaps in a Wide-9 defensive front, or dropping into the deep middle in a Tampa 2. He also has the job, in most instances, of calling defensive signals and making sure everybody else is in the right place and on the same page.

Defensive Prototypes: Linebackers

www.pff.com

I’m guessing VJ was more concerned about the mental aspect of it than Zaven’s play.

There’s no way for anyone to know if Zaven was aligning the defense correctly or not. I guess we will find out this year. Hoping this kid can do it.

Sure, this might explain the drop off except Hicks never (or very rarely) left the field when Collins was in the game. Collins never had the dot or set the defense.

Our defense was also at its best during this period.

 

[BritCard]

I find that one penis is enough, but I suppose it depends on the woman. How many have you all tried?

I also read the title as this!

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I find that one penis is enough, but I suppose it depends on the woman. How many have you all tried?

Uh

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I also read the title as this!

Lol, I had no idea where e was coming from there . . .

 

[kerouac9]

Exactly. Brit’s 1, 2, and 3 aren’t, and needn’t be, mutually exclusive of one and other. I want the team to leverage all of them in the most effective manner possible. And I don’t believe there’s a “don’t use rookies” mantra with the team. We’ve seen plenty of rookies get significant snaps over the years. Have they been crushing it? No, but I thinknwe see in their subsequent years that may be for a reason too . . .

100%.

It should be (in chronological order):

1) You draft good prospects
2A) Some of your rookies beat out the veterans on the roster
2B) Some of your veterans step up their game from the rookie competition
3) You sign your priority homegrown talents to second contracts
4) The season shows holes in roster construction
5) You sign veteran free agents to patch holes in your roster
6) Back to 1

There shouldn't be a conflict between drafting good prospects and signing good veterans. They competition should make both better.

 

[AZCB34]

You just said yourself that this org has a culture of preferring vets over starting rookies. There's no evidence of Collins mistakes. I certainly don't recall any obvious ones and his stats and PFF grades back that up.

They haven't stripped the roster of talent to force a change. That's a complete fabrication.

They always intended Collins to replace Hicks. they haven't seen anything in practice to make them think otherwise and now they are making the switch based on talent.

Most mistakes in football are probably more mental than physical which means you and I have no clue a mistake is being made. Missed tackles are only a tiny percentage of what is really happening

 

[Jetstream Green]

Do you honestly think that his practice was good enough for him to play 40% of snaps in game 1, then be good enough to see his snaps increase to over 50% by week 7 and then suddenly and despite months of practice and 7 weeks of game time he took a sudden huge step backwards?

Does that make sense?

That's the whole point, you are not privy to all the info and therefore at times it's of course hard to make sense. We are all just spouting off conjectures, but I guess in a "all in" attempt the coaching staff did not want to tolerate mistakes, though these youngins are going to make them and have to through experience till they get better. Could make sense that as more guys got injured like Watt and Alford his screw ups became more damaging and especially if he has that green dot and calling formations. It's plain and simple, no matter what we think about coaches, they want to win, and Collins and Simmons are not picking up on what is required for them to do. Maybe, Vance Joseph is putting too much on their plate. Maybe as the season progresses and adjustments are made the young guys we have cannot adapt fast enough

 

[BritCard]

That's the whole point, you are not privy to all the info and therefore at times it's of course hard to make sense. We are all just spouting off conjectures, but I guess in a "all in" attempt the coaching staff did not want to tolerate mistakes, though these youngins are going to make them and have to through experience till they get better. Could make sense that as more guys got injured like Watt and Alford his screw ups became more damaging and especially if he has that green dot and calling formations. It's plain and simple, no matter what we think about coaches, they want to win, and Collins and Simmons are not picking up on what is required for them to do. Maybe, Vance Joseph is putting too much on their plate. Maybe as the season progresses and adjustments are made the young guys we have cannot adapt fast enough

You don't need to be privy to all the data to apply logic to the situation.

All through preseason they watched Collins practice. They thought that was good enough for him to play 35% of snaps on the road in game 1 vs a super bowl contender.

What they saw of him in practice and in games from then through to week 7 was deemed good enough for his snaps to increase to 57% in week 7.

So using your own logic, they increased his snaps, that must mean they were happy with what they saw right? You don't give more snaps as the season goes on if you're not happy.

He then got injured early in the GB game and his snaps dropped off. Is it logical that suddenly after week 8 he regressed so much they massively reduced his snaps? I just don't see how that's possible or makes any kind of sense.

 

[Stout]

That's the whole point, you are not privy to all the info and therefore at times it's of course hard to make sense. We are all just spouting off conjectures, but I guess in a "all in" attempt the coaching staff did not want to tolerate mistakes, though these youngins are going to make them and have to through experience till they get better. Could make sense that as more guys got injured like Watt and Alford his screw ups became more damaging and especially if he has that green dot and calling formations. It's plain and simple, no matter what we think about coaches, they want to win, and Collins and Simmons are not picking up on what is required for them to do. Maybe, Vance Joseph is putting too much on their plate. Maybe as the season progresses and adjustments are made the young guys we have cannot adapt fast enough

Just let him go, Jetstream. He's locked in and not budging, no matter what. I mean, arguing with him now probably feels like arguing with me, so...yeah

 

[slanidrac16]

It's absolutely ridiculous.

There's a whole fabricated narrative now that Collins couldn't beat our Vallejo and Walker and that Vance is having his hand forced with Hicks cut. It's crap.

It's more likely that Vance just didn't want a rookie out there with Simmons who was still having some struggles in year 2 and it was considered a vet presence was more appropriate.

But the amount of fans writing off the young talent we have is sad. And when proven wrong they will just say "Well I was just going off what I'd seen so far..."

There is no better teacher than on the job training. I want to see rookies play as much as possible. I get your Collins analogy but really question why Eno and Ward didn’t get a lot more playing time where we had the game in hand.

 

[Syracusecards]

Lol, I had no idea where e was coming from there . . .

or how MANY

 

[kerouac9]

You don't need to be privy to all the data to apply logic to the situation.

All through preseason they watched Collins practice. They thought that was good enough for him to play 35% of snaps on the road in game 1 vs a super bowl contender.

What they saw of him in practice and in games from then through to week 7 was deemed good enough for his snaps to increase to 57% in week 7.

So using your own logic, they increased his snaps, that must mean they were happy with what they saw right? You don't give more snaps as the season goes on if you're not happy.

He then got injured early in the GB game and his snaps dropped off. Is it logical that suddenly after week 8 he regressed so much they massively reduced his snaps? I just don't see how that's possible or makes any kind of sense.

This is hilariously non-contextual.

Collins never appeared on an injury report or missed a practice with this mysterious shoulder injury. Before that, he played four snaps vs the Rams and just 16 vs the Browns. He played four more snaps against Houston than he did against Jacksonville.

People were asking questions about why he wasn't more involved and getting more involved as early as Week 4. Obviously something was different between Collins' development as a rookie and Simmons':

You must be registered for see images attach