Grant?

where was Grant in the 2nd half? did he get injured?

 

Benched, and because of that play. Their were two deep recievers, and he choose the wrong guy.

Grant does lead all NFC Safties in passes defended coming into this week, and had a couple before that play.

 

"We've had some poor safety play the last few weeks and, after that play where he misjudged it, we went with the next guy," Fox said.

Fox said it was too early to say if Grant or Richardson will start next week against Tampa Bay.

that's from the Charlotte Observer. You still in denial? he makes some great plays but has to eliminate giving up long TDs because of poor judgement. seems coach agrees that he has to bench until stupid wakes up. i think he will be a great one but it may take him a couple of games of riding the pine for the Fox's message to sink in . . . unless he too is in denial. didn't really care for his reaction to the press.

 

Not in denial (by the way, nice response to my questions in the "play calling" thread), but while he blew a play I don't see us pulling Witherspoon or Minter. There really weren't any good defensive performances this last week and there were plenty of goats.

But nice thread considering you already knew your own question's answer.

 

>> you already knew your own question's answer

no, i honestly didn't know at time that i posted. suspected he got benched but didn't want to jump conclusions. if they said so on the TV, i missed it. didn't hear the post game comments. in my shallowness, i admit that i kinda hoped he had been benched after the crucifying i took last week for suggesting such blasphemy. wasn't i called a dufus?

>> nice response

seemed like a pointless argument. and it's not like you have responded to every question that i have ever asked -- by your own admission, just the ones that you judge worthy. or, is it the ones that do not blow holes in you're arguments? ain't i allowed the same latitude to decide to which of your questions to respond to?

simply said, i am not smart enough to know good play calling from bad or to argue with you. i have stated several times that some of the play calling has seem weird. but what do i know? my only point is that it's awfully tuff to judge henning with the complete lack of talent he is working with. you don't agree with that. you are smarter than the rest of us, so who knows, you could be right.

you seem to feel he is playing scared. i think it could be smart to not try to force stuff that will continue to put your QB's life in jeopardy while having high probability of failing and high potential of turnover. which is something i have already said. i have nothing to add, so why respond to the same question again?

it seemed to me in the Atlanta game that again there was an awful lot of poor execution. weinke and fasani are both very limited at the moment and often make bad choices. fasani is able to create enough with his legs to help the offense. weinke does little right except throw to the right when he has time. james got off to a bad start and terry had a horrible game in pass protection.

running game is pretty feeble. don't have enough speed to get outside. mitchell is very good on run blocking and others, except steussie, seem pretty good too. steussie shields well but doesn't get any push. lamar is a good but not great inside runner.

moose, walls and hankton(?) all dropped balls in the hands again. receivers don't seem to be able to shake the press.

overall, i thought henning had done a good job of managing games with his limited offense talent to give the team a chance to win until yesterday. an awful lot of things went wrong yesterday (again) and not much good happened. think you can point fingers all around -- henning included -- but it happens. sometimes even good teams get outplayed and good coaches get outcoached. course you'll respond that in henning's case that is every week. so why should i argue?

if you're out to get rid of the guy and succeed, i won't lose any sleep. i guess folks need a scapegoat. i'm not infatuated with the guy. i think he deserves a chance to get some talent before we crucify him. but i didn't get any support when i thought Grant should be benched and haven't gotten any support on giving Henning a break. so why should i continue to argue with ya now?

by the way, where are all the experts that were crucifying the Falcoons for drafting Duckett? That cat is awesome. Dunn may have been a mistake but it would have been a much, much bigger mistake for them to have passed on Duckett. I hate it but they have put together a helluva team.

 

>>>>ain't i allowed the same latitude to decide to which of your questions to respond to?

The basic ones? You suggested in your post that it wasn't Henning's fault and that it's pretty much our talent and that he's doing his best with what we have. And you didn't answer.

>>simply said, i am not smart enough to know good play calling from bad or to argue with you. i have stated several times that some of the play calling has seem weird. but what do i know? my only point is that it's awfully tuff to judge henning with the complete lack of talent he is working with.

I'm judging Dan Henning's season, not his career or life. Don't pull the fake meekness routine. Lack of talent has no bearing on playcalling, since we don't adjust to anything else and tend not to stick to Henning's mantra of "using players to their best abilities".

>>you seem to feel he is playing scared. i think it could be smart to not try to force stuff that will continue to put your QB's life in jeopardy while having high probability of failing and high potential of turnover. which is something i have already said.

You never replied to the basicl points the last time, the points that suggest that we're accepting failure by not attempting to get the first down and the trickle down feelings of how the players ge discouraged from that end.

>>overall, i thought henning had done a good job of managing games with his limited offense talent to give the team a chance to win until yesterday. an awful lot of things went wrong yesterday (again) and not much good happened. think you can point fingers all around -- henning included -- but it happens. sometimes even good teams get outplayed and good coaches get outcoached. course you'll respond that in henning's case that is every week.

I don't find good management in this game nor in the games before that. I find poor offensive performance. There's talent here. It's not gobs of talent, but talent must be cultivated and used to its best advantages. I find very little evidence of that happening.

>>so why should i argue?

It's called discussion. The idea is to mot take it personally and to talk back and forth. let me know when the idea clicks in your head.


>>if you're out to get rid of the guy and succeed, i won't lose any sleep. i guess folks need a scapegoat.

I don't need a scapegoat. Henning is in charge of this and must be held accountable. Lack of talent is no reason to stop trying.

>>but i didn't get any support when i thought Grant should be benched and haven't gotten any support on giving Henning a break. so why should i continue to argue with ya now?

Exactly. When you don't think you can win, fail on purpose. Why try? the percentages are against you, so just crawl into a ball, take your racquet and go home, right? No wonder you like Henning

 

On a side note, I like how Wanstatt benched Surtain after he gave up a 70 yarder to Moulds.

And that one wasn't even called back for holding.

Wait a second....no....you say the wasn't benched?

Nevermind.

 

>> I'm judging Dan Henning's season, not his career or life. Don't pull the fake meekness routine. Lack of talent has no bearing on playcalling, since we don't adjust to anything else and tend not to stick to Henning's mantra of "using players to their best abilities".

Nothing fake. I honestly am not smart enough to either know good play calling from bad play calling other than from results of the play called. But as you have pointed out that, even plays that fail and/or get our QB sacked or knocked out of a game can be good play calls. And plays that have no chance of succeeding but occassionally do are bad play calls. So it gets confusing to me. I know that I am not as smart as you so I logically concluded that I have no businsee of continuing to argue with you. I think henning is doing all he can to maximise the limited talent he's got. Is there someone out there that could do it better? I'm sure. But I have not seen many calls that I thought were flat out bad calls. Overall, I think he has had good game plans and is optimizing his talent pretty well.

>> You never replied to the basic points the last time, the points that suggest that we're accepting failure by not attempting to get the first down and the trickle down feelings of how the players ge discouraged from that end.

I don't think we accept failure. Sometimes we do seem to postpone success by continuing to try to wear down the defense or setting up another play by running one that does not seem on surface to make a whole lot of fucking sense. Losing will discourage the players. Getting blown out will discourage them more. Players of strong character will remain strong; others will start to whine, point fingers and quit. Sorta like some fans.

>> I don't find good management in this game nor in the games before that. I find poor offensive performance. There's talent here. It's not gobs of talent, but talent must be cultivated and used to its best advantages. I find very little evidence of that happening.

Give me a break. The talent level of our QBs and receivers sucks. Moose has never been consistent. Smith can't hang on to the ball. And there's nothing behind them. Weinke sat for six games but has the same old problems. Fasani we're cultivating but is he ready? Our RB is old and average. Dee Brown is a poor man's backup at best. Our OL is average at best. Our best hope seemed to be running Smith up the middle and throwing in a few passes. It's tuff to adjust to teams ganging up on the running game when you don't have a single weapon in the passing game to scare anybody. And it got worse with the lose of Peete. If our QBs, which don't have cannons and ain't all that accuarate in the first place, are getting sacked or hit just as they are throwing the ball on 3/4s of the time they drop back and our receivers are not getting open or are dropping balls, I don't see where you see how to make this offense perculate.

>> It's called discussion. The idea is to mot take it personally and to talk back and forth.

Discussion is fine. But after a while the same discussion without hearing anything of interest gets old. I would think by now you would be tired of me repeating my no talent theme. Name calling hurts my feelings, not that you are guilty with me but you can be pretty mean just the same.

>> I don't need a scapegoat. Henning is in charge of this and must be held accountable. Lack of talent is no reason to stop trying.

See that's where we differ. I think he's trying. He won 3, coulda won 6 outa 7. I think its hard to hold a guy accountable until you give him some tools to work with. Unless of course, you're expecting him to pull rabbits outa his hat. Sorta like me boss.

>> Exactly. When you don't think you can win, fail on purpose. Why try? the percentages are against you, so just crawl into a ball, take your racquet and go home, right? No wonder you like Henning

win? um, i thought you said it was called discussion, which i took to mean friendly banter about a team we both love. is it discussion or a contest? i could argue with a brick wall the rest of my life and not "win" so at some point it just makes sense to say, i'm not gonna convince ya so i might as well go home. feel free to continue to take shots at me. i always enjoy reading your opinions.

 

>> On a side note, I like how Wanstatt benched Surtain after he gave up a 70 yarder to Moulds. And that one wasn't even called back for holding. Wait a second....no....you say the wasn't benched? Nevermind.

Didn't see the game you are referring to, so i am missing your point ... if you have one. All I know is what i read in the papers. Fox says they have had poor safety play for several weeks. And he's not sure if Grant will start at Tampa. Since they benched Grant and not Minter, I am assuming he was referring to Grant. Since he his threatening benching him for longer, I think he thinks he has a significant problem with Grant.

 

Point was a sarcastic one. Since we are being repetitive, I thought a little humor would lighten your mood. I guessed wrong. Sort of like Grant and Surtain.

Surtain got beat, bit on a double move.

They didn't bench him, he's a Pro Bowler.

Grant's not a Pro Bowler, but he does lead the NFC in passes defended.

Just an observation.