Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why Not Nic Harris?


Proudiddy

Recommended Posts

The LB we signed last year and played after all the injuries? I thought he played really well last year and hated to see him cut before the season started, but being that he's still a FA and we seem to throw anyone back there with a pulse, it wouldn't hurt to bring him back IMO. He performed better last year than anyone we have filling in at the two LB spots (open due to injury) has played this year.

I figure it's not realistic because he's still a FA and if they wanted him, I'm sure they would've already given him a call... But, am I the only one that thinks he could help this team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the circumstances last year when he was filling in, yes. DT was weak then too and the defense still held up really well despite the injuries at LB. Obviously, Beason has something to do with that - getting sideline to sideline, but the guy played relatively well compared to what we're seeing now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • He’s kind of overrated to be honest. Never really felt like a true #1 or elevated his play to become a guy the defense really has to worry about. 
    • I'm going to be real, the reason that vote ended up so lop-sided by the end was directly due to my programming. So there's nothing tongue in cheek about it. Also I left PFF after the Collinsworth acquisition (didn't want to move to Cincy) but have stayed involved in analytics via backdoor channels, but I can absolutely say that the experience was eye-opening, not because those guys are unquestionable football savants and that I became one by proxy, but because the amount of information that becomes available outside of what the typical fan has access to is revelatory and also really drives home how much context is still being missed even with all of that information. You don't discover that you know everything, you discover how much you still can't know no matter how hard you try, hence my point about the NFL not being able to figure out what makes a QB good. There's a lot of AI work going into that now and even that only seems to further confuse things vs. actually enlighten the problem. In the professional realm teams don't really talk about quarterbacks as A strictly being better than B, but how A can potentially perform better than B given a specific context of C. Of course those contexts may be wider for A than B, but there's also contexts where B can outshine A, even with lesser talent surrounding them. So what good teams strive to do is ultimately define a process of how they want their entire team to operate under schematically, find players that fit that scheme, and hopefully find a guy whose skillset will be maximized running that scheme with those players. Where bad teams fall of the wagon is constantly shifting those schemes and chasing bad fits or fads vs. sticking with a core identity and developing it.
    • there is a 100 mile long list of NFL players and coaches going to bat and defending horrible play from teammates.   
×
×
  • Create New...