10-06-2017, 08:35 PM
(10-06-2017, 07:55 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Sure, but WiM's point all along has been that either there was sufficient evidence that that OL should've been the starters from day 1, or there wasn't and the move was panicky. I agree, which leaves us with:I think this is certainly a false dichotomy. There are a myriad of other possible analysis, such as Little improved a lot with two weeks experience as a substitute. It was not a given that would happen. When it did, the coaches reacted accordingly. Even assuming the coaches should have known that would happen, until it did happen, their actions would have been appropriate. The two possible analysis presented are only two of many. In fact, I think these two are probably the least probable of what happened. They are far too simplistic, IMHO.
1) The coaching staff overvalue experience relative to talent; or
2) The coaching staff are overly reactive.
I think the totality of the evidence points to the former. Though, in their defense, they do seem to come to the right conclusions eventually, but it's unclear how many games we'll needlessly lose in the meantime...
